On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 12:19 AM, Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote: > On 26 May 2010 06:16, Peter Robinson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Bernie Innocenti <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hello everyone, >> > >> > we've just started a new development cycle aimed at providing Sugar 0.88 >> > for the XO-1. Our focus is stability and usability for deployments, >> > although we're also attempting to merge a couple of low-risk features >> > developed in Uruguay. >> > >> > Full details are here: >> > >> > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Deployment_Team/Sugar-0.88_Notes >> >> Is F-11 still the base OS for this? >> >> Peter >> > > Just for my knowledge, does Fedora have an equivalent to Ubuntu's long-term > support releases? > Without thinking too deeply about the implications, it make sense (to me) to > peg XO development to something that's stable over a few years. That way > package versions etc will be widely known and consistent. > /me reads [1]. Apparently not. Is there anyway to achieve > something similar without needing to pay for RHEL, which is probably a bit > of an overkill?
This is going to be one of the largest challenges. From Redhat's point of view, Fedora is an innovative upstream. when we land on a specific Fedora versions we will have to make the commitment to support it for a specific period of time. On the bright side Sugar on Fedora on the XO is self limiting to a very small set of hardware and a reasonably small set of packages. Expensive but not prohibitive. david > Best regards, > Tim McNamara > @timClicks > [1] > http://news.cnet.com/Long-term-Fedora-Linux-support-ending/2100-7344_3-6146604.html > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
