On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 11:31, Aleksey Lim<alsr...@member.fsf.org> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 10:45:32AM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> [adding IAEP to cc] >> >> On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 10:09, Bastien<bastiengue...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > Joshua Eddy <joshuage...@gmail.com> writes: >> > >> >> This is what Sugar Labs DC wants to bring to the table. For a more >> >> detailed description of this idea, please visit my blog: >> >> http://joshstechjournal.blogspot.com/ >> > >> > Nice idea! Thanks for sharing it. >> > >> > I presume ideally the config options would offer a website to publish >> > to, along with the Jabber service. >> >> I love the idea of having a site for children to share their work, I >> think this is going to be really big hit for Sugar. Congratulations on >> taking this task. >> >> We have been already discussing this in #sugar during the last week >> with Jeff and Aleksey and several good ideas were shared, will be nice >> to put all our thoughts in common when we get to more detail. > > Everyone is welcome to formalize thoughts on > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Server_Objects_Sharing > >> A somewhat minor concern I have with your proposal is that I'm not >> sure that just one global server will be enough for everybody. What >> about areas with local network but none or little internet access? If >> on the other hand deployments can set their own server as Bastien >> suggests, how would a child upload to the global one when connection >> conditions improve? > > But global server doesn't except local servers > think about www.flickr.com - its global option but every community could > have local servers. > >> One could imagine that the control panel would allow to set a list of >> servers and the Publish menu item becomes a submenu where you can >> select the server to upload to, but things get complicated fast with >> maybe not too much value. >> >> What I would propose instead, based on my experience, is to start by >> the very basics and build on that after getting some feedback from >> actual users. I see how a publish menu item in the activity palette or >> the journal makes it easier than having to go to a specific site in >> Browse, but if you restrict the modifications at first to Browse, then >> you can install your new activity version on any existing Sugar >> version. > > btw, why just not using Browse, we already do this in case of ASLO > is there real need to add additional complexity to sugar UI > at least we could start using Browse, get feedback and add new features > to 0.88(if its necessary).
That's what I was trying to explain ;) Though I do see some value in jumping over the step of opening browse and navigating to a specific site, just think that from the deployment side of things this could be better done in a future step. Josh, I think your blog has very interesting stuff about your work in Sugar, would you like to have it syndicated in http://planet.sugarlabs.org ? http://joshstechjournal.blogspot.com/ Thanks, Tomeu > -- > Aleksey > _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep