On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 12:19, Bert Freudenberg <b...@freudenbergs.de> wrote: > On 15.12.2009, at 15:09, Daniel Drake wrote: >> >> I believe there are still various well-known 0.86 regressions (over >> 0.84). For example, Record not working. These regressions are going to >> be a huge headache to anyone who tries to upgrade, perhaps you could >> squash a few of those. > > Speaking of upgrade headaches, the most significant UI change in 0.84 is > resume-by-default, which combined with the still not implemented versioning > is possibly unhealthy in deployments. I can see many Journal entries > overwritten for good. Has there been any experience with kids used to the > 0.82 way who switched to a later Sugar version? And if needed, would it be > easy for deployments to revert to not resuming by default?
Good point, reverting would be easy and also adding a setting to switch it on or off. I can work on it if someone takes the task of verifying the need. Regards, Tomeu -- «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David Farning _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
