David Zeuthen wrote on Fri, 31 Mar 2006 11:01:30 -0500 > On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 04:13 -0800, Krzysztof Kowalczyk wrote: > > Even Lisp Machine, > > Oh my. And, btw, is the source available?
Ask, and you shall receive ;-) http://www.heeltoe.com/retro/mit/mit_cadr_lmss.html > > Any of those systems seems like a better choice for OLAP than Linux > > system. Or a system designed and implemented from scratch, that uses > > the good things that can be learned from those systems (and Linux, if > > there really is anything to learn from it other than given a chance > > to redo things, you would probably want to do everything differently). There are very good reasons for OLPC to use Linux, but I don't think these two options are mutually exclusive. So much so that I am doing my own OS for a kid's computer. It would be just as unreasonable to ask the Fedora people to give up on Linux to work on something different (HURD? ;-) as to ask me to give up on Neo Smalltalk (previously Self/R and Merlin OS before that) to help fix Linux. Why not try both alternatives at the same time and see what result is best? > Can I suggest > > - Getting up to speed on the core technologies we plan to include > for OLPC and review these Indeed, though I have been using Linux since 1994 and keeping track of its development I hadn't had a chance to look into stuff like D-BUS or avahi: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/dbus http://avahi.org/ > - Think hard about why it's so important to people for this to be open > source and free software (and why in general this is a good idea) I didn't understand Krzysztof's examples as an argument against open source/free software, but as an echo of Alan's "don't forget to see the best that has been done in the past" advice. Personally, I refuse to call "educational" anything that the students can't look inside of. -- Jecel -- olpc-software mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/olpc-software
