[Sugar-devel] Gtk 3.10 icon size regression

Daniel Narvaez dwnarvaez at gmail.com
Sat Jan 18 06:07:34 EST 2014

On 18 January 2014 11:32, James Cameron <quozl at laptop.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 10:41:57AM +0100, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> > Just for the record I'm not sure wayland is completely out of
> > question for the XO, it does support non accelerated hardware to
> > some extent.
> The OLPC XO does have some accelerated graphics paths, just not as
> many or as fast as some other systems.

Great, one reason more wayland might work fine on it (on some models at

> > By the way, XO is our main platform from the number of users point
> > of view but it seems like a dead end at this point. So IMO it should
> > not be our main target when designing future solutions.
> Yes, but not for the reason you give.  The OLPC XO is still in
> production, and is still in deployment.  The best reason for not
> selecting the OLPC XO as your main target is so that Sugar can be
> suitable for as many platforms as possible.

Are new XO being sold? My possibly misguided feeling is that OLPC is not
even trying anymore.

> Any design decisions that leave the OLPC XO terribly behind will cause
> deployments to maintain a fork.

I agree. I have not said we should leave the XO behind. But there is space
to improve on other platform while not regressing on the XO.

> I'm aware of a volunteer deployment that has already taken this
> decision, because of the perceived effect of the GTK3 conversion,
> which did not live up to hopes.

Maybe you are not implying it, but to be clear that's certainly not a
"design decisions that leave the OLPC XO terribly behind".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20140118/5ee762aa/attachment.html>

More information about the Sugar-devel mailing list