On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 02:04, David Farning <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Paul Fox <[email protected]> wrote: >> david wrote: >> > As Bernie announced, we working on supporting Sugar .88 on the XO-1. >> >> hi david -- >> >> for those of us joining this thread late, can you expand on what/who >> you mean by "we"? (or tell me to read the archives, if that's >> more appropriate.) > > Sorry, By we, I mean Activity Central and compnay that Bernie, > Caroline, and I have started to support OLPC and Sugar deployments. > > It is going to take me awhile to figure out how to communicate with > the community. I would like to keep the larger Sugar and OLPC > projects aware of what our company is doing. But, I don't what it to > sound like a press release of pitch for the company:)
Any blog we could syndicate in the planet(s)? Regards, Tomeu > david >> paul >> >> >> > This projects is customer driven by the deployment in Paraguay. They, >> > along with bernie, made a decision that it would be more useful, >> > usable, and cost effective to settle on .88 rather than .82. This >> > strictly a decision made by a single deployment, which I support. >> > >> > As an ecosystem we can make lists of Pros on Cons why this is a good >> > or bad decision and why I am an idiot. At the end of the day this was >> > a decision made by a deployment. The primary reason for this decision >> > is that the deployment does not yet has an established base of .82 >> > machines. Something we need to be aware of as developers is that >> > deployments think on a much longer scale. As developers, if we have a >> > bug we can commit a fix and rebuild within a few days. Deployments >> > can take weeks if not months to push a minor update. >> > >> > Major version upgrades are something developers can do every six >> > months. From my experience a couple couple of weeks of 'hmmm, better >> > file a bug on that' and I have well running machines after an upgrade. >> > For a enterprise, such as a deployment, the decision to update >> > becomes much harder and takes much longer to implement. As Martin >> > pointed out, a significant amount of Quality Assurance goes into a >> > deployment upgrade. Not only do the hardware, OS, and learning >> > platform need to work together, all infrastructure, activities and >> > third party applications must also work after the update. The problem >> > just got significantly harder:) If I hit a bug while while sitting in >> > my office that is one thing. If a teacher hits a bug where the >> > computers no longer connect to the server that is another thing >> > entirely. >> > >> > On the other hand, there have been several significant improvements in >> > both Sugar and Fedora over the last couple of releases. It would be >> > valuable to make those improvement available to end users. >> > >> > My research has indicated that education institutions find that 3 >> > years is the right balance between stability and improved >> > functionality of new software. Because to the newness of the Sugar 2 >> > years is a reasonable first round of updates due to the higher than >> > normal increases in usefulness and usability. >> > >> > Blame and credit are important motivators in this game:( As such, if >> > we fail, it is the fault of Bernie, paraguayeduca, and I for: 1) >> > starting with a bad premise, 2) making bad technical decision, or 3) >> > making bad operational decisions. If we fail it will be due to the >> > cooperative efforts of deployments, Sugar Labs, OLPC, and other >> > interested third parties. >> > >> > david >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Sugar-devel mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel >> >> =--------------------- >> paul fox, [email protected] >> > _______________________________________________ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
