[Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)

[Gonzalo Odiard]

On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> things are looking good so far, we already have all the models booting
> into sugar 0.101 with wif apparentlyi working.
>

First, thanks for doing this work.



> I would like to take a step back and understand a bit better where we want
> to go with this. Some random thoughts and questions.
>
> * To really understand how much work is left I think we need some good
> testing, especially on the hardware related bits. I expect there will be
> lots of small things to fix, but it would be good to understand as early as
> possible if there are roadblocks. I'm a bad tester and I've never used the
> XO much, so I'm often not sure what is a regression and what is not... thus
> helping with this would be particularly appreciated.
>

This is a issue. If we have a Sugar with similar functionalities  (settings
and activities installed) we can request help from deployments and
volunteers.


> * Which deployments are planning to ship 0.102 soon and hence are
> interested in this work? I know of AU. Maybe Uruguay?
>

AU sure, if w don't have serious regressions. We need ask to Uruguay. Other
deployments usually update slowly.


> * Do we need to support all the XO models?
>

In a ideal world, that would make our life easier, we can define a eond of
line to our support of F18.


> * Should we contribute the olpc-os-builder changes back to OLPC or fork
> it? I don't know if OLPC will do any active development on the linux side
> of things, if not maybe better to turn this into a sugarlabs thing.
>

Probably James would know better respect of this issue. The changes we did
for AU are in a fork [1], but are not low level stuff,
just configurations.


> * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is
> not.
>

We are not using it. I am pretty sure Nicaragua use it.


> * Do we care about maintaining the GNOME "dual boot"? I'm afraid we do,
> but I want to make sure.
>

Yes. Is a important feature for the deployments. In the end deployments
don't ask for "Gnome", but for a standard desktop,
for some cases. If Gnome don't work without acceleration in F20, XFCE, mate
or similar can work.



> * As I mentioned in some other thread I'm interested in setting up
> automated  builds from sugar master. I have some vague plan of what it
> would look like and wrote bits of it. The basic idea is that you would push
> changes to github and get images automatically built. I think this is good
> for upstream testing but the same infrastructure could be used by
> deployments. Are people interested in using this?
>

I am not sure if do a complete build for every sugar commit have sense,
maybe yes do weekly builds, or automatic rpms.
The deployments usually make their own customizations, and will deploy one
or two images in a year.

-- 
Gonzalo Odiard

SugarLabs - Software for children learning

[1] https://github.com/godiard/olpc-os-builder/tree/au1b
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20140512/ae9d3365/attachment.html>