[Sugar-devel] Sugar-devel Digest, Vol 78, Issue 9

[James Cameron]

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 02:25:08PM +0200, Tony Anderson wrote:
> You have builds for XO-1.75 and XO-4 for Sugar .104. Does that imply
> that Sugar no longer runs on XO-1 or XO-1.5 or that there were not
> resources available to make that build but no known
> incompatibilities with the hardware.

That is wild speculation.

Perhaps "you" above is me, or perhaps it is Sugar Labs, I'm not sure.
Ambiguity arises from your use of digest mode.  Please don't use
digest mode on mailing lists, because it breaks threads.  Disabling a
feature many of us find useful is not conducive to communication.

Sugar Labs does not have builds for XO laptops of Sugar 0.104.  I'm
fine with that.  Sugar Labs should be hardware agnostic.

I've released builds with Sugar 0.104 on XO-4 and XO-1.75, known as
13.2.3, filenames 32016o2 and 32016o4.

I've builds for XO-1.5 and XO-1 but they have not been published.

I've made the builder available, configured for Sugar 0.104.

I've made Sugar 0.104 packages available for Fedora 18 and Fedora 20.

I'm willing to release the XO-1.5 build following private testing by
four people.  For which they receive my thanks.  It will be known as
13.2.4, filename 32016o1.

I'm unwilling to release an XO-1 build until a critical problem with
Browse is fixed.  https://dev.laptop.org/ticket/12866

We need a development focus on this problem, and it was mentioned at
the Sugar Labs Oversight Board last meeting.  Analysis so far; it is a
complex problem with Fedora 18 fonts, and nothing to do with WebKit.

As you will have seen in my posts on XO-1 performance, the XO-1 build
of Sugar 0.104 is performing very well in other respects, much better
than the previous XO-1 builds.  Lots of excellent work has been done
by Sugar Labs in the interim.

-- 
James Cameron
http://quozl.linux.org.au/