<div dir="ltr"><br>
|> 1. The datastore<br>
|> 2. OS Updates<br>
|> 3. File Sharing<br>
|> 4. Activity Modification<br>
|> 5. Bitfrost<br>
|> 6. Power management<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:02 PM, C. Scott Ananian <<a href="mailto:cscott@laptop.org">cscott@laptop.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><<a href="mailto:bmschwar@fas.harvard.edu">bmschwar@fas.harvard.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
</div><div class="Ih2E3d">> really surprisingly short. Each item on the list has been debated to a<br>
> stationary point over the last two years, so all that is left is to make a<br>
> final decision for the engineers to execute. Each task could be completed<br>
> or hugely improved by a single developer in a few months, provided that we<br>
> do not allow changes to the requirements, and the developers are not asked<br>
> to split their time and focus.<br>
<br>
</div>I do not believe that either of these statements is correct.<br>
<br>
We are not lacking in decisions: we have substantially complete<br>
designs; we are lacking implementation.<br>
<br>
Each of your items is not the work of "a single developer in a few<br>
months": solving these problems is realistically a year's work at<br>
least, if we have a single developer working full time on each. </blockquote><div><br>I have experience with numbers 1, 3, and 5, and am the principal person responsible for 4 right now. I would say that 3 and 4 are definitely within the "single dev in a few months" time frame; depending on the definition, 4 is in the "as soon as currently applied patches percolate into production" time frame. The further work on 4 - already started - is in the area of activity signatures, which is actually encroaching on 5. In a few full-time months of a single developer, this would put 4 at a place which other platforms could envy, and make concrete strides towards 5, to the point where security would be better, not worse, than other modern platforms (though I agree that there is plenty more work to fulfill the true promise of Bitfrost).<br>
<br>I agree that 1 is not so simple; while a rockstar developer might be able to solve all our problems in a two-month all-nighter, 6 months to a year is a more realistic timeframe to get something really solid and stable.<br>
<br>What I have accomplished - admittedly too slowly - on Develop, I have done in under half-time commitment. I have made it pretty clear that I was available for full-time work, pretty cheaply, but not for free. I could work to contract, with payment working out to around what the GSoC students are getting, and have Develop and Bitfrost in a significantly better place by the end of September (activity signatures done, bitfrost privileges by-application secure on that basis, the Terminal/Journal bitfrost "loophole" mendedl; Develop collaboration/source control starting to be usable).<br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
ps. and, of course, you've neglected "software for kids that does<br>
things kids want to do", "powerful and pervasive collaboration" and<br>
"mesh networking" in your list of items.</blockquote><div><br>All of which are slightly less sucky in their current state than the items mentioned, I think, but definitely need work too.<br><br>To sum up: if this is a matter of resources, just hire people. Me, and others who want it - I have heard marcopg complaining that he should be full-time, I think. In my case, the worst that could happen is that I don't come through, and, since I am asking for contract work, that would mean you don't pay me, so it would be identical to current situation. The best would be that for less than the price of a classroom-full of XOs, you would get large steps on two of these list items in a couple of months. </div>
</div><br></div>