Michael,
I took some of your thoughts... and the 'global' problem of no activities
shipped with XOs. ... ran with it a bit further. . . . :-)
Thinking along the lines, the set of 'recommended' activities per deployment
location are being discussed informally, without much tracking or
public-wide awareness... or input..
I couldn't find a good list of activities bundled for each deployment, so I
created a wiki page..
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Peru_bundled_activities
and
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/G1G1_bundled_activities
All from some 'inspirational' text I added on page. . .
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Getting_involved_in_OLPC#Upstream_Free_Software_Projects
*For each deployment location, OLPC staff will also work with local
administrators and volunteers to develop a consistent set of 'core bundled
activities'. To be installed on all base-software laptops deployed in that
area. For examples, see Peru bundled
activitieshttp://wiki.laptop.org/go/Peru_bundled_activitiesand G1G1
bundled
activitieshttp://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=G1G1_bundled_activitiesaction=edit
.*
I used the term 'bundled' until there's consensus on terminology to use.
I've read other terms such as 'core' (see wiki category) and 'activity
packs' (latest discussion on devel list).
I especially see this type of resource developing for coming up with a set
of activities for the G1G1 users, planning and looking forward to the
future... where some folks update to Update.1-700 (or newer), and get the
interesting surprise of no activities and no easy method of downloading
them.
Thoughts or continuations of these ideas? :-)
-Ixo
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear devel,
While drafting release notes for Update.1 RC2 (signed update.1-699), we
realized that we need a good story about what we want the ecosystem of
activity and library packs (for use with the customization key [1]) to
be.
The rough sense emerging from the folks I've interviewed so far
(dgilmore, kimquirk, walter, cjb) is that:
* activity packs are collections maintained by public maintainers
* people running deployments are responsible for choosing activities
that work for them and we should assist in this process
* for the moment, any activity packs that we provide are just
conveniences and advice to them on how to get started
* however, we should do our best to keep authoritative versions of all
activities we encounter and to encourage other folks to mirror this
content
* to the extent that we are able, we should record the compatibility
matrix between builds and activities
However, there are several questions that these rough thoughts do not
yet address:
* what assistance are we obligated to provide to deployments?
* if we discover notable flaws (security, legal, objectionable
content) in bundles that a deployment is using, what should we do?
* in particular, whose responsibility is it to initiate communication
of this sort?
* (and others not listed here)
Thoughts?
Michael
[1]: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Customization_key
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
