[Sugar-devel] The ARM is near

[Benjamin M. Schwartz]

Peter Robinson wrote:
> I think from the sugar perspective there needs to be some
> standard defined and recommendation made +to make supporting it easier
> rather than just sitting on the fence.

I agree.  I am trying to devise such a recommendation.  My goal is that
the recommendation also be a "path of least resistance" for Activity
developers, so that it's likely to actually be used.

> Deployments or people of course
> are then free to ignore those recommendations and package half a
> binary distribution up in their .xo if they so choose.

Of course.  They're also free to patch Sugar however they like.

> At the moment
> its not so much of an issue but moving forward I think that if
> something isn't well defined now we're going to end up with a massive
> support burden going forward with users coming to mailing lists
> complaining because activities don't work and that sugar is bad
> because nothing works.

I agree.  Consider, for example, an isolated school in Bangladesh, with no
real internet connection, running a mixture of XO-1.5's (x86-32),
second-hand consumer laptops (x86-64), Lemote machines from China (MIPS),
and XO-2's (ARM).  One kid gets a few gigabytes of activity bundles in the
mail on a USB stick from a penpal, and wants to share them with the rest
of the school.

I would like to make sure that this works.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20090828/94ae105e/attachment-0001.pgp