[IAEP] [POLL] collab.sugarlabs.org

[Tomeu Vizoso]

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 18:52, Ed McNierney <ed at laptop.org> wrote:
> Tomeu -
>
> I think everyone should understand that things have changed quite a bit since January of 2009, and interpreting year-old emails may be a little misleading.
>
> I think Chris is both right and wrong here.  You need to first remember that when that email was written, there was no XO-1.5 and no funding or plan to make it.  That was a huge change that happened in April.  If you decide that my statement was meant to apply to the XO-1.0, then I'd argue it's still correct.  If you apply it to the XO-1.5, a project that didn't exist when it was written, then it's wrong.
>
> In either case, there's a lot more to that email than just one sentence, and I'd prefer it if people read the whole message.  As pertains to the XO-1.0, it is still substantially correct.
>
> As it pertains to the XO-1.5, I think it's still true in the sense it was intended.  Look at the 9.1 project plan mentioned - it was a substantial set of Sugar and system features being solicited from deployments by a Product Manager (a job that still no longer exists) looking for feature enhancement requests to combine with our own ideas to design new major releases.  The "major" aspects of our 10.1 release are the (a) movement towards a more standard Sugar-on-Fedora platform as anticipated in the referenced email, and (b) the very substantial port to an almost completely new hardware platform.  The latter really is a "major" job but it was not at all something I was talking about last February.  So given that 10.1 is a discussion about a hardware device that didn't exist when the email was written, I think it's an out-of-context question.  The statement was clearly never intended to refer to a machine and project that didn't exist at the time the statement was made.
>
> However, rather than continuing to parse ancient emails, it's probably a far more helpful endeavor to answer a current question, and I don't know what that question is in this context.  What is the question that the reference to that email attempted to answer?  Thanks.

I wasn't asking any particular question, I just thought that the
reference to that email in the wiki could be easily misinterpreted
as-it-was and called your attention just in case you would appreciate
it.

Regards,

Tomeu

>        - Ed
>
> On Jan 14, 2010, at 11:44 AM, Chris Ball wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> What I don't know is if the contents of that message are still
>>> valid, e.g. "OLPC will not undertake, on its own, another major
>>> release of the software package we currently ship with each XO.".
>>
>> No, not still valid.  We just finished doing exactly that for 10.1.  :)
>>
>> - Chris.
>> --
>> Chris Ball   <cjb at laptop.org>
>> One Laptop Per Child
>
>



-- 
«Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar.
What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David
Farning