[SoaS] Plans for SoaS v9

[Peter Robinson]

On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 4:23 PM, Rodolfo D. Arce S. <rolf at sugarlabs.org> wrote:
> I realize that this is not merely a whishlist, but I would like to see
> added to the SoaS all other packages that are also present in the OLPC
> 12.1 build. I noticed just recently (because i haven't been using my
> XO for a while) that the standard OLPC build has the gnome (and
> desktop switcher) and several applications for it installed allong
> with the Sugar envirment.

I'm working as I get the time, along with Kalpa, to get the Sugar
Activities to the same list as OLPC ships. The biggest missing ones at
the moment is the Tam Tam suite.

We're not going to ever ship the gnome desktop as part of the SoaS
spin, but there's nothing to stop people installing it side by side
with SoaS if you install it to hard disk.

> It basically adds more packages, and I understand that it makes it
> harder to maintain, but it seems to me that it would be good to have
> the same enviroment for the SoaS as for the OLPC "desktop".

>From the sugar side of things we are basically the same. The distro is
based on the same package set and being derived from Fedora there's
nothing to stop you from installing gnome if it's what you want to do,
we don't have the resources to provide the support for it out of the
box.

> This was probably discussed before, but i would think that providing
> the same enviroment could help spread Sugar to a regular more wider
> audience of i686 (or x86_64) bit desktop or notebook/netbook owners.

>From the sugar side of things we are basically providing the same
environment. There's a few minor differences but not much. If there's
a particular sugar feature you feel is missing please let me know.
GNOME is not a missing feature... it's intended.

Peter

> Cheers
>
>
> 2013/3/22 Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com>:
>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I'm trying to get a little bit more organised for this cycle than I
>>> have been over the last couple.
>>>
>>> The plans for SoaS v9 are going to be somewhat simple. We're going to
>>> stick with the 0.98.x release of Sugar and focusing on polish.
>>>
>>> I would like to see more people testing and using it during the dev
>>> cycle so I don't get the "My Activity is broken" post release or five
>>> minutes before release when we're generating final images and pushing
>>> them out to the Fedora mirrors.
>>>
>>> I would also like to remove sugar-presence-service but that would mean
>>> either dropping eToys or the developers stepping up to actually fix
>>> the dependency that they've only been promising to do for 2 or so
>>> years.
>>>
>>> Is there anything in particular that people would like to contribute
>>> during this cycle? Anything I can help someone achieve? Does anyone
>>> want to dig into the documentation on the web site to improve the
>>> process?
>>>
>>> I'd also love marketing to get involved since we've not had any
>>> publicity for a number of releases and after all Walter was telling me
>>> some time back that it's the biggest single driver in the wiki.
>>>
>>> Finally there's a Test Compose for the alpha available in the
>>> following link. I've used it briefly in a VM and it boots and seems to
>>> mostly work.
>>>
>>> http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/19-Alpha-TC1/Live/
>>
>> I forget to mention for this cycle we'll also produce SoaS images to
>> run on a number of ARM platforms. The first test of these should
>> arrive around F-19 Beta.
>>
>> Peter
>> _______________________________________________
>> SoaS mailing list
>> SoaS at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
>
>
>
> --
> Rodolfo D. Arce S.
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/~rolf
> _______________________________________________
> SoaS mailing list
> SoaS at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas