[IAEP] Not running for SLOBs re-election
Hi everyone, I've decided not to run for re-election to the Oversight Board -- I've been happy to help, but I think that four years is a long enough tenure for me; I'd like to see us add new voices and ideas to the board. So, please encourage anyone you know who's involved with deploying Sugar to consider taking part! We'll definitely need new faces now that one of the incumbents isn't running. Thanks for letting me serve for so long. I'll still be here at OLPC and helping out when I can. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] OLPC tablets and Nell in the wild?
Hi, On Wed, Oct 31 2012, Mike Lee wrote: That experiment did not involve anyone from Sugar Labs or the community. The article is based on an education panel at EmTech 2012 that, for some reason, has not been posted as video yet. Check here: http://www2.technologyreview.com/emtech/12/ But Matt Keller and the OLPC Association team who ran the project went into great detail in their talks at the OLPC SF Summit over a week ago. The Livestream on the subject has been archived and is viewable at the these links: A minor point: I consider myself part of the Sugar Labs community and expect that C. Scott does also; maybe others from the team too. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] meeting reminder
Hi, On Mon, Sep 17 2012, Walter Bender wrote: For once I remembered to send a meeting reminder :P We (the Sugar Labs Oversight Board) will be meeting tomorrow (Tuesday, September 18) at 17:00 EST, (21:00 UTC) on irc.freenode.net (#sugar-meeting). Please join us for a discussion of our annual report to the Software Freedom Conservancy and some topics regarding our programs in internationalization (i18n). Apologies, I won't be able to make it; am in Shanghai for XO-4 bringup. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Local Labs motion
Hi, I'm sorry I wasn't there; it conflicted with OLPC's weekly engineering meeting. I should be able to make the next meeting. Responding in reverse order: On Wed, May 30 2012, Walter Bender wrote: Also, there was motion [8], not yet seconded, to ask Tony if he was OK with a change in the wording of [4]. There was not consensus on the wording, but there was consensus on asking for Tony's input. I don't think this needs to be voted on -- we can talk to Tony without voting to decide to talk to Tony. Let's do that. Buried in the meeting log [1] is a motion [5] to adopt three changes [2, 3, 4] to the Trademark [6] and Local Labs [7] pages in the wiki. The motion was seconded and we began a vote, but whereas it seemed to be a controversial decision, I though it prudent to ask those who were not able to attend today's Sugar Labs oversight board meeting to also vote. So far, walter +1 cjl +1 icarito -1 alsroot has not voted yet. cjb, canoeberry, and geralda were not present. Please respond to this email with your vote. Since we'd like to consider revising the third statement, I'll vote -1 on this motion -- my impression is that we don't all consider the proposed wording ready to be decided on, which is a good reason not to adopt it yet. (Voting this way now doesn't mean I'd definitely vote this way again on the same text in the future; it's because we're still looking into revising the text, not because I find the change unacceptable.) Thanks! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS]: Request for certifications of developing an activity
Hi, On Tue, Jul 12 2011, Walter Bender wrote: Can we discuss this? I think it would be good to have a certificate program of some sort. I image that if we get sign-off by 2+ experienced developers, we should be willing to award some sort of certificate (perhaps we can get the design team to work something up.) Perhaps we could tie the certificate-awarding to posting an activity on ASLO and getting a review from someone on the Activity Team or something? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Narrative Interfaces at OLPC
Hi, On Wed, Jun 15 2011, C. Scott Ananian wrote: I just posted an announcement for some invited talks we're having at OLPC's new offices this Friday: http://cananian.livejournal.com/64747.html It will all be live-streamed at: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/cscottnet We're all done with Narrative Interfaces day now, and I've uploaded video from all of the talks. There's a blog post at: http://blog.printf.net/articles/2011/06/18/narrative-interfaces or if you're super-impatient, you can jump straight to the videos at: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/sugarlabs/ Thanks! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] FW: [OLPC Bolivia] No logro aprender Sugar / I cannot learn Sugar why would YOU want to?
Hi, On Wed, Jun 15 2011, Bert Freudenberg wrote: Maybe it's just me but I replied how I felt as I read what was written. So, I still want to know what his purpose is for spending time with the olpc? Based on what I read, he sees the apple as our competitor. I could have done without the apple promo. Well, Sugar as installed on the XO is much less polished and versatile than most other operating systems in wider use. Carlos simply compared Sugar to the OS most familiar to him. His point would still be mostly valid had he compared it to $YOUR_FAVORITE_OS. Well, not really. Consider: Let's imagine now that Debian directors decide to save money by firing all the great programmers they employ, dedicated to write their operating systems. Let´s imagine they decide that a group of volunteers, worldwide, with a horizontal organization without chiefs, is the latest model in modern business management. What would happen? How much longer would Debian survive? Days? Hours? ... - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] meeting reminder
Hi, On Sat, Jun 11 2011, Christoph Derndorfer wrote: Am 07.06.2011 20:59, schrieb Walter Bender: We will be having a Sugar oversight board meeting on Thursday, 9 June at 18:00 EST (23 UTC) on irc.freenode.net http://irc.freenode.net #sugar-meeting. We have 4 items on the agenda: (1) Scratch License (Walter) (2) OSD vs FS definition of FOSS licenses (Walter) (3) Membership fees (Bernie) (4) 3rd party Sugar merchandising (Dogi) Please join us. Hi, unfortunately I didn't have time to attend the meeting:-( Are the meeting minutes and/or logs available already? I can't seem to find them on http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Oversight_Board/Minutes They're always at meeting.sugarlabs.org straight away: http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2011-06-09 - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Next slobs meeting?
Hi, On Sun, Jun 05 2011, Bernie Innocenti wrote: The very short summary is that there are two different licenses for Scratch: one for the source code, which prohibits calling the resulting binary Scratch and uploading projects to the website, and one for binaries, which doesn't allow modification. It's hard to notice the problem, because they don't mention it even in the license FAQ. Just a quick addition: the source license *also* prohibits commercial use. So, even if we accepted the rules about naming and uploading as being just a ham-fisted attempt to implement trademark law inside a copyright license, the non-commercial clause would still be a show-stopper. :/ - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Videos from EduJam
Hi, I've uploaded video of 17 EduJam talks now. More to come! http://blog.printf.net/articles/2011/05/14/edujam-2011 http://www.dailymotion.com/sugarlabs Enjoy, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] SL Dailymotion account
Hi, Does anyone have the login info for the sugarlabs dailymotion account? I'm trying to work out where the best place to upload ~70GB of video from EduJam is. :) (Other suggestions are welcome too. Youtube only allows 15 minute chunks unless you're a partner, and Vimeo charges too much for upload bandwidth.) -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] SL Dailymotion account
Hi, On Tue, May 10 2011, Steve Thomas wrote: Chris, My youtube account all of a sudden said You can now upload more than 15 minutes and I was able to upload my Squeakfest talk from 2010 (will be uploading more soon). Not sure why, but some others may have this option as well. I can upload some, but would be better on an OLPC/SugarLabs channel. Yeah, it's explained here: http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2010/12/up-up-and-away-long-videos-for-more.html It's only for long-lived accounts that are manually trusted by YouTube, though, so I don't see a good way to get an edujam/sugarlabs account with those privileges quickly. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] ANNOUNCE: Moving Sugar to GPLv3+
Hi Bernie, On Fri, Apr 22 2011, Bernie Innocenti wrote: You've expressed some valid concerns and I believe I've responded satisfactorily to all of them. If not, I'm glad to hear a counter-argument from you. I think you've repeatedly ignored Scott's claim that you can't modify COPYING or the source files because that would be *changing* the license, rather than taking advantage of GPLv3 redistribution rights. Can you ask Brett or someone at the FSF what the right thing to do is? - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] ANNOUNCE: Moving Sugar to GPLv3+
Hi, On Fri, Apr 22 2011, Chris Ball wrote: I think you've repeatedly ignored Scott's claim that you can't modify COPYING or the source files because that would be *changing* the license, rather than taking advantage of GPLv3 redistribution rights. Can you ask Brett or someone at the FSF what the right thing to do is? I chatted with some FSF staffers on IRC, they agree with Bernie's interpretation that modifying COPYING and the source headers *is* the way that you choose to redistribute under the GPLv3+ instead, and that it's a modification of the license that was explicitly allowed ahead of time by the or later clause. They haven't yet been able to find any documentation that explains this or backs it up, though. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] New: Sugar Labs finances status page
Hi Christoph, On Thu, Apr 21 2011, Christoph Derndorfer wrote: Am 22.04.2011 00:46, schrieb Mel Chua: At the SLOBs meeting a few hours ago Are minutes or the log available from that meeting? Couldn't find a link to them yet on http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Oversight_Board/Minutes Log's at http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2011-04-21#i_2660201 - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] New: Sugar Labs finances status page
Hi, On Thu, Apr 21 2011, Walter Bender wrote: Log's at http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/2011-04-21#i_2660201 The links are in the wiki now as well. Not sure where all the meeting minutes went to... need to investigate. We had another meeting afterwards, that's why it looks like there aren't any minutes. For the SLOBS meeting, the links are: minutes: http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings/2011-04-21T19:00:15.html full log: http://meeting.sugarlabs.org/sugar-meeting/meetings/2011-04-21T19:00:15 - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] GPL non-compliance, was Re: [SLOBS] GPLv3
Hi, On Wed, Apr 20 2011, Yamandu Ploskonka wrote: AFAIK (please correct me) Uruguay is not providing code, thus in violation of GNU license, and this situation has not been solved after several years. Which code are you talking about? With GPL 3 will the Uruguay security code be considered a System Library and thus exempt from providing code? That might be an elegant way out from what I believe has been their systematic non-compliance in this respect, and maybe get them to open the rest (which is silly, as the machines would still be blocked...) I don't understand. If you're talking about security code that Ceibal has written then they're the copyright holder, and they're under no obligation to choose to release the source to it. The GPL doesn't compel the original authors of code to do anything unless they are linking their code against a GPL-covered work. I don't think Ceibal's security code is linked to any GPL-covered work, and don't know why anyone would have that intuition. I've never actually seen their code, though. If you're talking about Ceibal modifications to the Sugar core, then they're surely available by virtue of being shipped in Python source form in Ceibal's images, which satisfies the GPL. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org http://printf.net/ One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Google Summer of Code 2011
Hi Dinko, I'll get on #2 this weekend and report my progress/ideas on Monday. For start, I'll need to rework the interactive example I made because I've used a bad approach of not separating the data from the code there, and to take into account the suggestions I got. I might have missed a mail -- did you make any progress with this? It'd be great to have this work be usable by others. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] For Sugar Everywhere, Google-ize!
Hi Scott, Thanks for the proposal, lots of combustible material here. :) I wouldn't be very excited about just porting Sugar activities to a stock Android base. I think our goals for Sugar are mainly to build educational software that: * can be appropriated -- translated, modified, discussed. * encourages creation rather than mere consumption of content. * encourages joint collaboration and sharing. I don't think stock Android apps can do these things well, so I don't think we're advancing our goals by creating stock Android apps. Of course, you can still have a good educational experience on Android that *doesn't* meet our goals, but I'm assuming we're willing to let other people work on that; it's not what we consider Sugar to be about. (I'm not disagreeing with your perception of where Sugar is now, just arguing that a new proposal should still be able to meet our goals.) So, we'd have to be modifying the Android base OS, as you suggest. I think this idea would make much more sense for OLPC than for Sugar Labs -- it's fine for OLPC to go hacking around in Android and create a code editor, and Journal and Collaboration services and so on, but it would be really hard to get anyone on a non-XO to be able to run them because Android is so fragmented. Each hardware vendor has their own Android build (which they aren't obliged to provide source for!), and most vendors ship devices root-locked to most users. How would Sugar Labs be proposing that owners of Android devices actually *run* our patched Android OS, if we don't even have the vendor's source to patch? Have you got any ideas on the above? Again, I'm not disagreeing that someone *could* make a Sugar-like environment by modifying Android, just that it doesn't seem like Sugar Labs is the right group to be interested in doing that, because it would be so hard to actually ship the result without control over a hardware platform. SL would go from producing software that can run on most machines to producing software that needs to be hand-tailored for each device.. How about ChromeOS instead, then? Rumor is it was too slow to get going, and is either going to be canceled or just merged with Android: http://techcrunch.com/2010/12/14/gmail-creator-paul-buchheit-chrome-os-will-perish-or-merge-with-android/ Of course, I don't actually believe everything I read on TechCrunch, but the fact that it's an immature and unproven platform is undeniable; SL shouldn't bet the farm on it as a platform yet, surely. Thanks! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] For Sugar Everywhere, Google-ize!
Hi Scott, If Android apps to date have not accomplished this, that just means there's an opportunity! I think the infrastructure is what's missing here: reusable libraries for collaboration / sharing. Something Pippy-like or Java-compiler-like that makes it possible to distribute your app's source along with the app itself--*and do something with the source on the device*. I don't think these things are impossible. I think they haven't been done. I'm saying that I think they actually *are* impossible without adoption from Google, if you need to hack the Android core and you're trying to create software that will run on many Android devices rather than one. It could be that Google is interested in making Android apps be pervasively modifiable by users but simply hasn't done it yet (though one imagines their app store authors would hate the idea -- look, I just set the isRegistered bool to TRUE to avoid paying for this app!), and it could be that they really want a real-time collaboration API and just haven't done that yet either. I agree that it would be very exciting if both of these things are true. But if they *aren't* true then it seems like anyone trying to ship this software on hardware that they don't control is just out of luck. How about ChromeOS instead, then? Rumor is it was too slow to get going, and is either going to be canceled or just merged with Android: The link you posted is just a wild guess. Sure, agreed. Consider ChromeOS just a fancy name for Chrome the browser. Chrome the browser has Apps and lots of extension hooks. You can make sugar activities run entirely inside the browser. ChromeOS is convenient, because it embodies build tools and hardware configurators and all the other details, freeing SugarLabs to work on the education stuff. It's basically Fedora to Sugar-on-Linux. It's replaceable. Think instead of what a truely web enabled version of Sugar would look like. Sugar which could run in any Chrome browser -- although you might have to install a chrome extension first. That does sound interesting -- I don't know much about what it's possible to do with JavaScript these days, but the combination of being faster than Python and being pervasively editable is exciting. Do you know of any proof-of-concept Chrome extensions that do activity-like things or allow you to modify their own source on the fly that we should check out? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] For Sugar Everywhere, Google-ize!
Hi Christoph, So based on these assumptions, given the limited amount of resources available, and assuming I haven't missed anything your suggestion would basically mean sacrificing the potential to significantly improve the experience of the current 1 million Sugar users to develop something for unproven potential future markets and users. I'm not so quick to posit a zero-sum allocation of resources here -- we haven't got everyone interested in free educational software on this list yet, right? And having a different platform that's more accessible (i.e. runs cross-platform in browsers) or more hackable (view source that just works) seems like it could easily attract more developers into the fold. So I don't think this is a good enough reason to dismiss radical new work out of hand. Of course there are people interested in making the current Sugar environment more powerful for its large installed base, and there are people interested in new cutting-edge technology designs, and they aren't necessarily the same people. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] For Sugar Everywhere, Google-ize!
Hi, Stepping back for a moment, the key question is: how can we get Sugar out of the window manager and network manager and activity update and UI toolkit business, where it's just not keeping up (and wasting our efforts), and concentrate on the stuff we're all really here for: enabling kids to learn and explore and share? How much can we strip away and still have Sugar? I agree that this is the right question. I think we can strip everything *other* than: * Can be appropriated -- translated, modified, discussed. = A view source key The ability to modify apps The ability to run your modified apps The ability to reuse a document created in one app inside other apps * encourages creation rather than mere consumption of content. = Strong authoring tools for: Written documents Vector and bitmap graphics Animation Presentations Stories * encourages joint collaboration and sharing. = Sharing documents and messages between users Real-time synchronous collaboration between users High-level synchronization of data structures à la groupthink What do folks think -- did I miss anything important? Did I list anything that doesn't deserve to be listed? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] For Sugar Everywhere, Google-ize!
Hi Christian, (I should probably stop jumping into this thread and let other people reply so I can find out what they think too!) I also believe the support for those users should not deteriorate, meaning folks like the OLPC Support Gang need to learn the new system (assuming troubleshooting beneath the interface changes as system-level features change) without sacrificing their dedication to the existing system. For every 100 units with the new and improved Sugar that roll out (assuming it reached production), how many units out there still would require support by experts in the old architecture? OLPC's working on a tablet, so there'll be a huge amount of retraining needed for both the support-gang and deployments when a deployment orders XO tablets -- standing still with the current software simply isn't an option for them. And, forgive me on this one because I realize Sugar and OLPC are not necessarily tied at the hip, but what happens if Sugar moves too far from the OLPC's five core principles? Will that necessitate an OLPC Sugar and a Sugar Free, developed with no XO-specific code or even OLPC-oriented goals? Just wondering where OLPC ends and Sugar begins... It's a good question, but don't forget that there are plenty of OLPC people around in the Sugar world, including on the SLOBS board; we've been working closely together since the beginning, and OLPC is willing and able to yell if a software proposal sounds like it wouldn't work out for us. It's in all of our best interests to find a way to pool resources and work together! Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Google Summer of Code 2011
Hi Michael, 3. Dinko Galetic, Lucian Branescu Mihaila, and Sebastian Dziallas all successfully completed their Google Summer of Code projects. Congratulations and thanks to Google for sponsoring the work and to their mentors Stefan (Dogi) Unterhauser, Luis Gustavo Lira, Michael Stone, and Sascha Silbe, and to Tim McNamara for organizing the Sugar Labs GSoC program. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Summer_of_Code/2010/Improved_Sugar_on_a_Stick http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Summer_of_Code/2010/Pippy_improvements and http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Summer_of_Code/2010/Abstract_Browser This reminds me -- it looks like Dinko's changes were not merged into Pippy mainline. Can you tell us about the status of his work? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Hackety Hack tutorial for Sugar
Hi all, Over the Christmas break I built a Sugar activity for Hackety Hack (http://hackety-hack.com/), a programming tutorial using Ruby. It's x86-only because it includes a copy of the Ruby binaries. Tested on Fedora 11 on the XO: http://dev.laptop.org/~cjb/HacketyHack-1.xo I'm not going to have time to work on this any more, though -- perhaps someone might be interested in taking over and uploading to ASLO, etc? Thanks, -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Hackety Hack tutorial for Sugar
Hi Manu, Sure, I'm happy for anyone to maintain it. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Will This Work???
Hi, Actually it would be great if all the Journals on XO could be (by default) open for reading (and commenting) by everyone in the learning community / local, near by XO users. That would be the exact opposite of great and it's something Bitfrost intends to protect against [1,2]. The Journal is called thus for a reason: It records _everything_ the user did on the system (within Sugar, that is) and not just school-related work. If Journal entries are to be published, it needs to be on an opt-in basis, not opt-out. I think this argument is independent of Bitfrost; it's just a policy decision about public-by-default vs. private-by-default. Bitfrost (if implemented) would try to enforce privacy, but that doesn't mean it would make everything always be private; just things that it thought the user wanted to be private. We decided many years ago to go with private-by-default, hence the current UI of opt-in sharing. I still think it's an debate with compelling arguments in both directions, but changing the decision now would probably be too counter-intuitive to everyone, even if we decided that public-by-default wins on the merits. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Announcing the OLPC OS 10.1.2 final release!
Hi, I'm very pleased to announce build os852 as the final 10.1.2 release build for XO-1 and XO-1.5 laptops. Here are its release notes: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/10.1.2 Instructions for installing the release on an XO can be found at: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/10.1.2#Installation Many thanks to everyone -- testers, translators, documenters, developers and others -- who contributed to this release! As I mentioned when announcing that this release would happen, being able to release 10.1.2 for both XO-1 and XO-1.5 at the same time was enabled by a group of volunteers who created XO-1 Fedora 11 builds: our particular thanks to Daniel Drake, Bernie Innocenti and Steven M. Parrish for their work towards this release. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Mesh Dreams = OLSR
Hi Reuben, Consider the benefits of using open source software versus our closed source firmware and partnering with communities like Freifunk whose network is ~ 800 node, guifi.net is almost 10k nodes in Barcelona, Athens Wireless is 5k nodes. The fact that a custom mesh algorithm would have to run on the CPU -- prohibiting any kind of idle-suspend -- makes it a non-starter for an XO deployment in my eyes. Did you have any thoughts on this? - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] next meeting?
Hi, We've not met much this summer. I'd like to propose we meet next Tuesday at UTC 15:00 (EST 11:00). Does this work for everyone? Yes, works for me. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Suggested change to Arithmetic blurb on http://activities.sugarlabs.org
Hi Tim, I feel we should replace that text with: Arithmetic is an activity that allows learners to compete in maths challenges. Learners choose their a difficulty level and whether to do addition, subtraction, multiplication or division. Challenges work by Arithmetic providing questions to every learner sharing the activity. Responses to those questions are checked and timed. The results are presented on a scoreboard. Changed to your version (with minor modifications). Thanks! Now, if only we could get people to fix up the code too. ;-) - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SLOBs weekly update, 2010-07-11
Hi, Walter forwarded the 3 requests. +1 from me to all 3. If that's a +1 from Walter, Bernie, and myself, we need one more SLOBs +1 vote on each to pass it. +1 vote on each from me too. Thanks for pushing on this, Mel! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Announcing the OLPC OS 10.1.1 final release!
Hi, I'm very pleased to announce build os206 as the final 10.1.1 release build for XO-1.5 laptops. Here are its release notes: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/10.1.1 Instructions for installing the release on an XO-1.5 can be found at: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_notes/10.1.1#Installation Many thanks to everyone who contributed to this release! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Announce: OLPC software strategy.
/~sayamindu/sugar_vkbd_multi.ogv -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SLOBs meeting tomorrow?
Hi, I should be able to make Tuesday too. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] What does No wp tag mean?
Hi, No wp tag It means that disable-security has already been run once, so you don't have to do it again. (We might want to make it say that explicitly.) - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Crazy Idea
Hi, Some schools are getting iPod touches (??? is that the plural) for their elementary schools to use. Apple has a big push with this and has several demo projects going. I saw one at CUE in March. Very impressive! All they need to make it perfect is some Sugar Apps! Single user Sugar Activities in Python should be fairly easy to port. Smalltalk, no problem. Full collaboration would be a lot of work, due to its extensive use of Linux-specific libraries. Sounds like you're unfamiliar with Apple's ban on interpreted languages: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/04/apple-scratch-app An Application may not itself install or launch other executable code by any means, including without limitation through the use of a plug-in architecture, calling other frameworks, other APIs or otherwise. No interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application except for code that is interpreted and run by Apple’s Documented APIs and built-in interpreter(s). - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] One Laptop per Child and Marvell Join Forces to Redefine Tablet Computing for Students Around the World
Hi Peter, There is an ARM port for Fedora, and it happens to work very well with the Marvell ARM chips with at least two contributors from Marvell helping out. The Fedora ARM port is good enough that it was used straight up as the basis for the MeeGo ARM support. The only thing that's missing is a kernel for the specific device as the arm kernels can be very device specific but I doubt that will be a major issue as that is currently the case for the XO-1 and XO-1.5 (of course I wish its wasn't but there's still outstanding kernel patches needed for event the XO-1). Thanks. I've been using the Fedora ARM packages on our Marvell board, so I do know about their status -- what I meant by no port is that it's not an official Fedora port, not even as a secondary architecture yet. I don't know whether it would be a good idea to ship product with a Fedora remix based on a port that doesn't officially exist yet; at the least, it would require a lot of work. For example, there's no Fedora 13 release for ARM yet. They're still on F12. The Fedora ARM movement is growing very quickly with a full koji build farm of 20 odd buildsystems and an increasing community. Unfortunately, as I understand it the koji build farm has been dismantled, with some replacement machines on order, but I agree that there's some promising momentum behind Fedora ARM. From the gnome side I mostly agree, although the underlying infra will be fully multitouch enabled with gnome 3. The issue with the gnome 3 interface, which is relatively touch friendly, is its dependence on 3D GPUs for the OpenGL rendering and the face that the existence of open source 3D drivers on ARM is non existent and even worse than the state of the x86 a year or two ago. Our hardware only supports OpenGL-ES rather than OpenGL, so that's a complicating factor too. Let me know if you need help, or details of people from the Fedora side who could assist. Thanks! I'm already spending time with the #fedora-arm folks, and we are considering trying to use Fedora all the same. It's not an easy decision, though. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] One Laptop per Child and Marvell Join Forces to Redefine Tablet Computing for Students Around the World
Hi, http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/one-laptop-per-child-and-marvell-join-forces-to-redefine-tablet-computing-for-students-around-the-world-95007559.html The press release doesn't say so, but the tablet will run Sugar and GNOME over Fedora. A belated follow-up: I don't know why you said this, because we've made no such decision yet. Sugar's a safe bet, but there are large obstacles to running either Fedora (no ARM port yet!) or GNOME (not suited for touchscreen use) on the tablets. We'll let you know when we do announce the software stack for XO-1.75 and XO-3. (The fact that we haven't decided what to use doesn't mean that we definitely *won't* use Fedora or GNOME. It simply means that we haven't decided yet. Advice welcome!) - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [Marketing] OLPC rules out Windows for XO-3
Hi Tim, As soon as I heard that OLPC was moving to ARM, I winced slightly. This is going to make life much more difficult, because of our longstanding Linux, Python and recent GNOME heritage. What is Sugar Labs' role with the XO-3+? I don't understand -- the XO-3 (and XO-1.5) will run Linux, Python and Sugar, as described in Ed's e-mail at the start of this thread. What has become much more difficult? ARM chip architecture makes a lot of sense from a power perspective, but that was also the case when x86 was chosen for the XO-1. Perhaps even more so, as Intel has been steadily increasing the power friendliness of its x86 chips, with Atom so forth. The cost savings with ARM is significant, too. I guess I'm going to need to learn to love curly braces :/ I don't see why. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [Marketing] OLPC rules out Windows for XO-3
Hi, Linux has been running well on ARM for a long long time. Yeah. In specific, today I got Sugar running on the ARM SoC we'll be using for XO-1.75 and XO-3, and it didn't require any porting at all. It would have happened yesterday, but I had to work out how to get past the Sugar intro/login screen without a keyboard. :-) - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Announcing the Development Team Lead election
Hi Tomeu, I actually stepped down as development team coordinator which is/was an administrative role, I wasn't the development team leader because that position has never existed before in our community. I tried to make it very clear on the email you cite. Sorry about that. I wasn't thinking of a strong distinction between the two; we started talking about electing a new lead in the SLOBS meeting, and the title stuck in my writing. - being a responsive upstream for work we receive from the community: this sounds like a rather big responsibility to me. For example, what will happen with modules that are unmaintained such as hulahop and browse? For this point, we were thinking about someone who makes sure that patches sent in for review are replied to and applied quickly (perhaps via delegation), rather than someone who will single-handedly maintain all the code we've received in the past. In short, we want to make sure that there's no bottleneck on community contributions of patches at the SL end. - appointing a release manager for the next (0.90) release: if you mean just formally appointing whoever the team members choose, then I'm fine with it, but it's not obvious for me as it's expressed. What about the other positions related to development, the team lead also need to appoint those? Until now we have never seen two people competing for a role, nor disagreement on a candidacy. We talked in the SLOBS meeting on Friday about our urgent need to start planning 0.90, and decided that finding a release manager would be a good first task for the new development team lead/coordinator. If the development team is already able to appoint a new release manager, you should certainly go ahead and do that -- we were operating under the assumption that no-one had been found yet. (I think part of the reason I had that assumption is that the wiki page for the development team only lists you and Simon as members.) http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Contacts - coordination with the Design and Deployment Teams on new features: do we really need that the team leads takes this responsibility as well? Or is assumed that the team lead will delegate it on others? I think that team leads should take responsibility for this, but that the responsibility can be satisfied by delegating it to others. May I suggest that both candidates and voters are restricted to development team members? This would encourage interested people to join the team, strengthening it. I think that by giving some autonomy to teams we'll be encouraging them to take ownership of their areas. That sounds fine, if you're saying that standing/voting is still open to anyone, but that they should first sign up to join the team before doing either. I agree is very important to find people interested on leading efforts and taking responsibilities, but I think is equally important to have a team structure that encourage division of work, diversity of opinions and pooling of resources. Makes sense. Sounds like we should defer to the Development Team in defining the role. I'm also not sure we need a full-blown election with selectricity. I'm thinking that open voting on the mailing list may be enough, unless we are expecting that people won't vote freely without anonymity. Okay. Let's continue gathering candidates as we were, and then the team can decide what to do with the result; whether to have an internal election, full election or something else. Thanks to you for taking this important task, I'm very happy to see we are making progresses on this area. Hope the concerns I have raised above aren't seen as push back but as sincere opinions. No problem. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Announcing the Development Team Lead election
Hi everyone, Tomeu's stepping down as the Development Team Lead¹, and we'd like to elect a replacement. This is an important position -- the team lead is responsible for setting clear goals for the team, being a responsive upstream for work we receive from the community, appointing a release manager for the next (0.90) release and helping to define its scope, and holding regular Development Team meetings on IRC, including coordination with the Design and Deployment Teams on new features. There are more details on the role and the team here: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team The position is open to anyone; if you're interested in nominating yourself, just add your name and platform to: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Development_Team/Team_Lead_Candidates_2010_05 The platform -- and the election as a whole -- is an opportunity to express your view on development directions that Sugar should take. The nomination period will be open for seven days, closing at 00:00 UTC on May 22nd. Then the election will run for ten days, starting at 00:00 UTC on May 22nd and finishing at 00:00 UTC on June 1st. All Sugar Labs members are eligible to vote, and will receive a token for doing so by e-mail. I've volunteered to run the election. Finally, many thanks to Tomeu Vizoso and Simon Schampijer for their great work as the Development Team Lead and Release Manager! - Chris. ¹: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2010-May/023825.html -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Chil ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Peru, OLPC and Wikipedia
Hi, Hello All... I've been following your comments on this. Am I the only one who finds this charming but at the same time strangely disturbing What did you find disturbing about it? - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Peru, OLPC and Wikipedia
http://vimeo.com/8709616 -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SPAM]Re: [SPAM]An intelligent sneakernet for the XO.
Hi, Perl is part of every LSB-compliant Linux distribution (IIRC), and I believe it is shipped on the XO. No, not shipped on the XO. (Not shipped on XO-1, currently shipped on XO-1.5 but will be removed if we can work out how to avoid breaking dependencies by doing so.) - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] non-free activities on ASLO
Hi David, There is a growing ecosystem of non-free activities for the sugar and the .xo . Is there an official policy on hosting non-free activities on activities.sugarlabs.org? Yes. We ratified at a SLOBS meeting that non-free activities (or content) should *not* be hosted on ASLO, and attempted to specify what we mean by non-free: http://meeting.olpcorps.net/sugar-meeting/sugar-meeting.log.20091211_1002.html [10:13:24] cjb MOTION: adopt http://opensource.org/docs/osd as a set of guidelines for what is permitted on ASLO, for both software and content, and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses's opinions on specific licenses where applicable, and always asking the SFC for advice when a particular license is under question. ... [10:16:56] mchua seconded [10:17:33] mchua yea [10:17:35] cjb yea [10:17:42] SeanDaly yea [10:17:44] tomeu aye [10:17:47] walterbender yea [10:17:53] bernie yep I am interested in establishing a 'market-place' for sugar activities. It would seem that we have three choises: 1. We can work to incorporate it into the existing also instance. Limited firewall between commercial and non-commercial portions of the project. 2. We can establish a second instance of aslo called marketplace.sl.org - This establishes a firewall between the non-commercial and non-commercial parts of the project. It also leverages and builds up the Sugar name. 3. I, or others, can establish third party markets independent of activities.sl.org. If we continue with the policy that was voted on, I think it would be important not to have anything inside .sugarlabs.org endorse or offer non-free activities, which would suggest choice 3 in your list above. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs GSoC 2010 Application In
Hi, Sugar Labs application for Google Summer of Code 2010 has been accepted. Wow, that was quick. Many congrats and thanks! Oops -- I assumed this meant that the application had been reviewed and SL is accepted into GSOC, whereas the intended meaning was just that the application itself has been accepted, and will later be reviewed. My mistake! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Kurzweil in Wine?
Hi Caroline, I've seen a great deal of interest in Text to Speech. Students with severe enough disabilities to qualify get Kurzweil, but it costs $1000 for a one seat licence! There's text-to-speech software for GNOME (so, generally compatible with Sugar) called Orca: http://live.gnome.org/Orca It'd be a great project to integrate this formally with Sugar. I'm curious if anyone has played with Wine on Sugar and how well it would work to let some kids still have access to Kurzweil even when using Sugar? I think it would not work, because Wine will not have access to anything happening in Sugar. Also does anyone know what they are using in Uruguay with vision-impaired students? Not sure -- a few .uy deployment engineers are around on the -devel@ lists, so they can be asked directly. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Sugar Planet syndication instructions
Hi Bernie, Pitiful Earthlings, the Mighty Masters of Planet Sugar established the following unilateral peace conditions: Is there a reason to make this a manual process, instead of e.g.: cp /current/config /.planetconfig for i in /home/*/.planet; do cat $i .planetconfig; done ? - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Scenarios for licensing our trademarks
Hi Sean, I don't see how the opposite is true. Just look at Sony. To be clear, by freely I mean without conditions. The snag is that I don't see how we can be sure we have a legal handle on acceptance of our conditions without an explicit license. Again, this is a change from my original position of two weeks ago. I think the reason I'm quick to assume this is possible is that it's how the GPL works. Either you are complying with its conditions, in which case you have a (copyright) license, or you are out of compliance with its conditions, in which case you don't. I don't see why the same idea of an automatic license that is only granted while its conditions are met would fail to be usable in a trademark license, but maybe there's a reason I haven't thought of. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOBs] Scenarios for licensing our trademarks
Hi, I'd be happy to work on that. Would RT with an autoresponse a la help at laptop dot org be a suitable system for this? We're still brainstorming rather than being ready to set anything up, but yes, I think that would be a perfect fit for this. Bernie just raised an interesting point in the SLOBS meeting; the workflow could be: * someone mails automatic-tradem...@sugarlabs.org * they receive the latest copy of the trademark policy * they GPG-sign it and mail it back to us * the bot acknowledges receipt, perhaps with a trademark license number. This would satisfy getting a clear response from both sides. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOBs] prep for Friday's meeting
Hi, Chris, not sure how well this matches up with your understanding, but my reading of what you wrote makes it appear to me as if they're the same. I like it! I don't think you need to ask_SLOBs() about any product, joined with SL mark formulation -- my reading of 2(b) is that such a formulation (regardless of which product or joined with words are used) would not require written permission. So, here's a patch. :) --- old 2010-01-20 22:56:35.0 -0500 +++ new 2010-01-20 22:56:41.0 -0500 @@ -1,6 +1,7 @@ if SL_software_bundled_as_distinct_component == True: - if name in acceptable_list: + if name in acceptable_list || + name.matches(product, joined with SL mark): return Yes, you have clearance to use the marks. else: - ask_SLOBs(product, joined with SL mark) + ask_SLOBs(your proposed use) (I think the way to apply both patches to the draft is just to change with prior written back to without prior written in the preamble of §2.) Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBs] Sugar on a Stick usage motion
Hi, MOTION: Yes, Sugar on a Stick should be reserved by Sugar Labs for use by the SoaS-Fedora distribution so that Sugar can be marketed effectively, until such time when a trademark policy, agreement, and process is put in place: SoaS will be the first project to go through that process. I second, if no-one else's e-mail client beats me to it, and vote aye. Thanks, -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Wanted: List of Sugar activities for the XO-1.5
Hi, I'd suggest Stopwatch http://dev.laptop.org/~bemasc/StopWatchActivity-3.xo Thanks, added. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Wanted: List of Sugar activities for the XO-1.5
Hi, What about leaving it unstarred? I'd hate to leave out a good practical activity just out of indirect fear; similar arguments could be used as reasons not to have a word processor or spreadsheet altogether. Yes, I'm in favour of shipping Finance too, as long as Wade thinks it's ready/usable enough. A local decision not to include it is fine, but separate from the question of what we should provide as a default. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [ASLO] [NOMINATION] Skype-1
Hi, I guess its another point for future policy[1] for ASLO editors, should we allow non-FOSS software on ASLO. Even in the unlikely event that we decided to allow non-FOSS software on ASLO, we are legally unable to distribute Skype because its copyright license doesn't allow us to. The activity should be taken down immediately, for that reason. (Sorry, Marcos.) - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Wanted: List of Sugar activities for the XO-1.5
Hi folks, We'd like your help in coming up with a list of default-installed Sugar activities for the XO-1.5 software release. The current activity list, which wasn't chosen with any particular criteria or thoughtfulness, is: Analyze Browse Calculate Chat Distance Etoys Implode Infoslicer IRC Jukebox Labyrinth Log Maze Measure Memorize Moon Paint Physics Pippy Read Record Scratch Speak TamTam * Terminal Turtle Art Typing Turtle Words Write Any suggestions for activities to add? A reasonable set of criteria for looking at the suggestions seems like: (a) works on 0.84 (and preferably 0.82) (b) complete translations for OLPC deployment countries (c) reasonably low disk space use (d) download popularity on activities.sugarlabs.org Thanks! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] (Please read) Re: Proposed Trac - Launchpad migration
Dear Sugar folks, This mail didn't get any replies, but it's important to know whether people agree with it before going ahead. So, please understand that: * bugs.sugarlabs.org is moving from Trac to Launchpad. * Existing bug data will be imported, but the bug numbers won't be the same. * It will be hosted by Canonical externally, rather than by SL as Trac currently is. If any of these are not to your liking, the time to speak up is now, before it all happens. :) Thanks for reading, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] New activity: Arithmetic.
Hi Caroline, Hi Chris, I had a crazy idea for Arithmetic yesterday. Its a wonderful game for the GPA. Its exactly the kind of practice the students at GPA need. Its collaborative and other people are a huge key to engagement. But as you said it needs a little something more to make it fun. This sounds like a good way to make it more fun, although I suppose it's making the game longer by making the players wait for someone to place a piece in the Physics world before getting a new question; another way would be to replace the numeric scores with icons that race towards a finish line as their owners score points, perhaps. Unfortunately, I don't have any talent for the UI stuff -- the hope was that by getting the collaboration part of the activity out there, someone with UI skills will adopt making a fun UI for it (and better scoring, and better question generation logic, etc). :) Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Announcing the creation of a SoaS Decision Panel
Hi all, In Friday's SLOBs meeting, we approved the creation of a decision panel, with the following people eligible to join the panel: Sebastian Dziallas Luke Faraone Martin Dengler Bill Bogstad Faisal Khan Benjamin M. Schwartz Samuel Klein Sean Daly Tabitha Roder Caryl Bigenho Daniel Drake Abhishek Indoria (If anyone else had volunteered but is missing from the list, the group is welcome to add them in too.) The approved scope for the Decision Panel is large. We decided to describe it as: Investigate the situation of how SoaS should be treated by Sugar Labs, and related questions, including answers to the following: * Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases? * Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another? * Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution? * Any other question the Decision Panel deems required to provide an answer to the original question: Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution? How the panel proceeds to organize themselves and answer these questions is entirely up to them. Once a report is ready, SLOBs will review it and vote on ratifying its suggestions. Thanks, - Chris, for SLOBs. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] Long-term support for Sugar
Hi, If it were on me, I'd just ditch the XO bundle format and use native packages for each distro. Some are already being packaged, and the Python distutils are capable of producing rpms and debs with the same ease of our current setup.py scripts. But then every child in Uruguay (plus other deployments that withhold root from their users) would hate you 'cause they wouldn't be able to install activities anymore. A solution that results in a significant percentage of Sugar's users not being able to download activities anymore is not a solution. If we could switch to .rpm *and* find a good way to install .rpms without being root, though, that would be pretty compelling. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] [SLOBS] Long-term support for Sugar
Hi Peter, Its called PackageKit :-) See discussions from previously... And with the good python bindings for it there shouldn't even be too much work to add support for that into the control panel. And the other massive advantage that PackageKit has is that it works with multiple package backends so it will with Debian, Fedora, Ubuntu, SuSE and alot of other distros as well so it should be usable by all distros :-) Would it be safe against someone trying to gain root in a %post script, though? - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] [SLOBS] Long-term support for Sugar
Hi, TBH I'm not 100% sure on that as I'm not a PackageKit developer but I believe that is addressed by ConsoleKit and as its in use on Fedora and I'm pretty sure Ubuntu and others (and I'm pretty sure its an external dependency of gnome too) I'm sure that issue has been addressed. My understanding is that the developers consider it addressed by %post runs as root, and if you don't like it then don't install RPMs [from untrusted sources]. So, we need to find out what's up there. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SLOBs Position on SoaS
Hi, I am all for Sugar Labs protecting, owning and bestowing the SOaS monickers, and for full recognition to Sebastian's work (and other's within the Fedora one, and the other options). Who will pay? I don't think anyone needs to pay anything. If we announced that the SL policy is for Sugar on a Stick to be reserved for SoaS-Fedora only, I'd consider the name to be protected and owned. There can be a different conversation about what would happen if, even after we said that, someone refused to follow it. That seems pretty unlikely, though, given that SL is small enough that we know all of the actors personally. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] SLOBs Position on SoaS
Hi all, Let me rephrase again, to make things clear. I'd love to hear an official answer on this. Soon. Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution? Martin Dengler has persuaded me that having SLOBs vote on this issue could help us move forward, even though there obviously isn't community consensus on it yet. I'm uncomfortable with the idea of having SLOBs vote on community-wide disagreements, but I have a plan for that, which I'll explain in a moment. First, I'd need to know what the specific questions (with yes/no answers) that people are interested in a vote on at the SLOBs meeting next week would be. Some things I've read that might be those questions go something like: Should Sugar Labs be a Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases? Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another? Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution? To avoid forcing a vote on questions that shouldn't be answered by SLOBs, I propose that the answers for each vote should be: * Yes * No * We should talk about this question more before voting on it * We shouldn't vote on this question for some reason (e.g. ambiguity in the question, or wanting to abstain) To add a question to the list (I'm not going to add any of them myself), please add to the bullet points at: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/index.php?title=Oversight_Board/Minutes#Friday_18_Sept_2009_-_14:00_UTC If you don't like the idea of this becoming a SLOBs vote, it would be useful to say that too. Thanks, - Chris, wearing SLOB hat. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] SoaS: Searching for Decision Panel volunteers.
Hi all, Sebastian Dziallas has asked for clarity on how the SoaS distribution he maintains is going to be treated and considered by SL. It doesn't seem that there's consensus, so we suggest forming a Decision Panel: On the rare occasion of a contentious issue on which no general consensus can be reached, the Oversight Board is responsible for convening a Decision Panel. The Oversight Board will be responsible for determining when a Decision Panel is required and for selecting members for the Decision Panel. Members of the Oversight Board are not permitted to serve on a Decision Panel. A Decision Panel will solicit community input, discuss (in private if they deem it necessary), reach a conclusion internally, and produce a report documenting their conclusion. (Anyone may submit advice to a Decision Panel.) The Oversight Board will review and ratify Decision Panel reports. -- http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Governance This mail is to ask for volunteers for the Decision Panel. Volunteers can be anyone with an interest in the outcome, and the Oversight Board will then vote on (a) whether to convene the panel, (b) who should be on the panel, and probably (c) what the decision being paneled is. :) Please volunteer by replying to this mail if you're interested, and please do so by Thursday September 24th so that we can run the vote at the Friday September 25th SLOBs meeting. Thanks! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [Sugar-devel] SLOBs Position on SoaS
Hi Sebastian, In my opinion, Sugar Labs has about four options how to act wrt SoaS. (1) SL decides the current SoaS to be *the* SoaS and enforces the brand. (Did you know that you're able to lose a trademark when not enforcing it?) Exceptions could be granted by a trademark committee. I think you're going to get seven different answers from seven different SLOBs, but it's very reasonable to ask. Personally, I would go with (1), establishing that SoaS is a product of SL. I wouldn't make any future-exclusionary statements of the form SoaS is going to be the only way that SL distributes Sugar; it should be a positive statement about how SL feels about SoaS, rather than a negative statement about anyone else's current or future work. I don't think I'm ready to support actually filing a trademark application, because I think that costs at least a thousand dollars per registration per year that we don't have and could be better spent, and it doesn't really change much -- it seems that saying The SL policy on using the following terms is this as a social statement should be almost as effective as making the expensive legal statement for us. FWIW, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org One Laptop Per Child ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] New activity: Arithmetic.
Hi, Over the last few Sunday afternoons, Ben Schwartz, Michael Stone and I have been hacking on a new activity. It's a collaborative arithmetic quiz, and extensively uses Ben's groupthink collaboration module. Here's a link to a bundle: http://activities.sugarlabs.org/downloads/latest/4204/addon-4204-latest.xo http://activities.sugarlabs.org/addon/4204 The game tries to show all the participants the same questions at the same time, gives an ongoing scoreboard of how many questions each participant has answered correctly, and measures the amount of time it takes everyone to answer each question. It also lets the group choose which of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division their game should use, and how hard the questions should be. We think it's pretty fun already, but it still needs plenty of work, and we'd love to have help with it. Some obvious next steps are: * Artwork! We haven't spent any time making it pretty. If someone wants to go ahead and rip everything apart and put it back together in a way that actually looks attractive, that would be awesome. * Looks like I messed up the logo in Inkscape, and it doesn't have the correct stroke_color references. * It crashes when resumed, as opposed to launched with Start. Haven't looked into that yet. * Gettextification and translations. * An algorithm for scoring that depends on how quickly an answer is given. (One idea could be that you get 9 points if you answer with 9 seconds left, down to 1 point for answering with 1 second left.) * A natural end to each round, perhaps involving giving out medals (just as Typing Turtle does) for achievement to the participants. * There may still be cases where it shows entirely different questions to the participants, instead of everyone seeing the same ones, and we'd like to know about that so we can fix it. If anyone's in a position to get feedback from kids on whether playing this collaboratively is fun, and what might make it more fun, that'd be really good to hear. We'd welcome everyone's changes to the activity; we can always back out a change if it needs to be discussed more, so don't be shy about pushing changes to a branch or asking for direct commit access. (If there's some way to allow anyone with an SL gitorious account to commit directly, that would be an ideal setup.) The GIT tree contains groupthink referenced as a submodule, so to check it out: git clone git://git.sugarlabs.org/arithmetic/mainline.git Arithmetic.activity cd Arithmetic.activity git submodule init git submodule update Thanks! - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] New activity: Arithmetic.
Hi Christoph, * there should be some sort of start button to get the quiz started, I felt quite an adrenaline rush when I started the activity and saw the clock ticking away immediatedly Makes sense. I think this comes under an artwork improvement; there could be some kind of start shared game screen (when the first person chooses to share the activity) where you wait for everyone to join up and then hit the first countdown together. * there seems to be quite an issue with syncing collaboration because initially the activities on both virtual machines were off by maybe half a second or so but after leaving them running for 10 minutes the difference had increased to more than 6 seconds. Oh, that's very interesting. I don't think I have an explanation, but maybe Ben does. I was thinking that it might be the cumulative delay of our gobject timer firing, but we're starting a new question based on *absolute* time passed, not relative, so that doesn't fit after all. I'd be interested to know whether there's been six seconds of clock drift (as measured by date) between the two machines! Bryan also asked me to show the activity to the folks here at the OLE Nepal offices so if I get any feedback from them I'll forward it to you. Great, thanks very much, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] the SoaS term
Hi, I completely disagree. To me, SoaS is a specific distribution coined by Sugar enthusiasts (who happen to also most/all of them also to be Sugar developers). I disagree as well. I'm quite satisfied with SugarLabs' support and usage of the SoaS .ISO as produced by sdz and its team, especially because the largest distributor of Sugar continues to use the same base distro on its laptops. Disagreement thirded. Sugar on a Stick is a reasonable proper noun; it's not like Fedora on a Stick or openSUSE on a Stick are in use, which would be a convincing argument towards the phrase being generic. I think that one of the reasons the name was chosen was due to the pun of a lollipop being sugar on a stick, so the name's specific to Sugar in that way. I think SoaS has been widely understood to refer to a set of popular Fedora builds that Sugar Labs (rather than a distribution) creates itself, as a product. It might have been good to pick a different name in the beginning, but it doesn't seem like it's worth changing that now. - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] Titanium App
Hi, We talked a while back about activity development that looks more like web development, and I see that Titanium App has released a Linux preview release today: http://titaniumapp.com/ - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] How to upgrade XOs to Sugar 0.84?
Hi Christoph, Off the top of my head I'm wondering whether there's a chance to get the Sugar 0.84 release signed so it can be run on XOs without having to request a developer key? I think you should go the devkey route. OLPC can't sign any builds that don't contain its security infrastructure (if it did, an attacker in a deployment with security enabled could just reflash to this new build, escaping the security) and Sugar Labs is unlikely to produce a build with all the OLPC stuff in. I should mention that the olpcfriends gang is considering the idea of conducting community XO releases for a release following 8.2.x; if one of those is created with OLPC's security work in, I can imagine it being signed. OLPC's trying to phase out its centralized security, though, so I still recommend getting the devkeys. Thinking of copy-nand I realize that this would also wipe the Journal with everything the children have created so far... Is there any way to avoid that and do some sort of olpc-update that actually downloads the Sugar 0.84 release? The Sugar 0.84 release won't be something that's bootable on an XO, it's just Sugar. Once you know which OS release that contains Sugar 0.84 you'd like to use, though, it's possible to do what you describe; olpc-update takes a --server flag to allow you to specify your own update server, and you can run your own olpc-update daemon on an XS server (which can be somewhere out on the public net, if you like). - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Flash at Sugar Labs
Hi, This might be of interest: Salasaga is a GTK/Gnome based IDE used to create eLearning for applications. With it, you take screenshots of your applications, add highlights, text and external images, then generate learning objects. Present output is in swf (flash) format. Here's another app that appeared in my RSS reader today, I haven't tried it; it seems to contain some of the ideas Bryan's interested in, though: http://www.blueskyonmars.com/2009/01/05/build-desktop-apps-with-web-ui-and-python/ http://titaniumapp.com/ - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Flash at Sugar Labs
Hi, When the primary mission - educating the world's least served children - comes into conflict with Software Freedom, which one wins? How do you explain that to the deployments? This is a fine question. Here's my shot at it. First, I think it would be a mistake to think that we're the only group of people, or the only software project, interested in educating these children. It would be helpful for me, then, if we could be more specific about what we in particular are trying to do (although it contains the risk that we won't agree on that). It seems to me that Sugar exists because we claim at least the following failings of most educational software projects: * they don't allow the knowledge they contain to be *appropriated*. For example, translated into other languages or cultures so that it can be useful for the entire world, or modified, commented on and discussed. They might choose to disallow this technically (by not providing a method to perform the appropriation) or socially (by actively disallowing it). * they don't allow children to be *creators*, and not just consumers. We believe, as a consensus, that the best way to learn is by creation and problem-solving rather than by being dictated to. * they don't allow learning to be *collaborated upon*, critiqued, and conducted jointly. I'm sure this is less eloquent than the text that's already been written on our goals, but it's a start. What follows from it is that we should build software that: * is eminently modifiable by all, so that it can be appropriated into areas of the world and use cases that its authors did not consider. * should allow not just the consumption of content, but its outright creation. * should provide for pervasive sharing. Why did I just repeat all of this? It makes it easy for me to see that a system like Flash is not (yet) appropriate software for learning as we envision it, because it would not support our strategy of _how_ to achieve education of the world's children, and that strategy is our reason for not sitting back and letting the rest of the software projects out there solve the problem for us. For this reason, I would support having Sugar Labs advocate against the use of Flash, and think I can do this in an intellectually honest way. This doesn't mean I would stop someone from writing a Flash player wrapper if they want to, and it means I would likely change my mind if free Flash players and editors became more available. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Flash at Sugar Labs
Hi Stanley, The FlashPlayer is a virtual machine for display of highly visual, interactive, and compelling software content. I don't agree that use of Flash as a platform would be incompatible with our strategy of _how_ to achieve education of the world's children just because it was created under the proprietary umbrella of Macromedia and now Adobe. Please re-read my e-mail -- Flash's creation story was not in the list of reasons I gave for finding it an inappropriate platform for Sugar. Regarding free development tools, the FlashDevelop IDE is free open-source and quite good for developing source code for the FlashPlayer. The various development kits (SDK) from Adobe and 3rd parties for Flash development (ActionScript, Flex, AIR, Away3d, etc.) are free downloads. Even if any of these tools were usable for the creation of Flash content (my impression is that they aren't), none of them run under the same operating system as Sugar, which makes them unavailable as editors for learners using Sugar (most of whom currently use Sugar on the OLPC XO). My argument is that a learning environment whose reason for existing is to encourage the creation and appropriation of content by learners should not attempt to accomplish this using a platform that provides *no method* for the learners using it to create or appropriate content! Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] How to Make Activity Designers Happy , Parts I and II
Hi Bryan, Sadly, Javascript can't use the Graphics Processing Unit like Flash can. Ouch, The XO doesn't have much of a GPU, so I wouldn't be so worried about this. Any Javascript renderer that backs onto cairo will get as any other graphics on the XO. Many people will likely hate my promotion of Flash for learning activities. It's OK if you hate me and Flash. I do hope you recognize that we need a more developer-centric activity framework that uses web technologies. Making activity development easier is an unarguably fine goal, but I don't think there are any simple solutions. For example, do we even have a Flash editor under Linux? Is the first instruction on how to write activities for someone in the developing world going to be First, pirate a copy of Windows and Adobe Flash Professional, and then..? - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Request for help packaging activities for Sugar on a Stick
Hi Caroline, But Sugar without activities is boring!! We need you and your activities! Please help us get activities quickly ported to Sugar on a Stick, we have a lot of people pounding on our doors to try it. I don't suggest waiting for activities to be packaged, and no porting should be required: can't you just preinstall a bunch of .xo files? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball c...@laptop.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Announcing Fedora Sugar Spin!
Hi, Hi everybody, I'm proud to be announce the availability of our Fedora Sugar Spin, which incorporates the Sugar Desktop Environment on a Fedora Live CD. Cool! http://sdz.fedorapeople.org/olpc/sugar-spin.iso I just gave this a try using kvm on Rawhide, and it worked fine: % sudo qemu-kvm -m 512 -cdrom sugar-spin.iso A minor complaint: Sugar came up in 800x600, which doesn't look very good. I wonder if we can try for 1280x1024 by default instead. (It might just be the graphics card qemu is emulating, but even if that's the case we should consider fixing it for qemu..) Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Individual Membership
Hi, On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 03:38:45PM -0500, David Farning wrote: An Individual member is someone who has made a significant and sustained contribution to the Sugar Labs ecosystem -- of any type -- and who has explicitly agreed to the Individual Contributor Agreement. What's the Individual Contributor Agreement, and why would we want one of those? Communities should wait until they get large before they start instituting bureaucracy that turns their potential new members away.. - Chris. -- Chris Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Sugar Labs Individual Membership
Hi, On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 07:06:12PM -0500, David Farning wrote: What's the Individual Contributor Agreement, and why would we want one of those? Communities should wait until they get large before they start instituting bureaucracy that turns their potential new members away.. Most project have some sort of agreement. Citation? Many of the largest free software projects in existence have no such thing -- GNOME, Ubuntu, the Linux kernel -- and each has widespread ties with all kinds of businesses. Sometime they are as simple as 'I am who I say I am and have the right to contribute what I will contribute. One of my goals is for a vibrant ecosystem of businesses, NFPs and NGOs to form around Sugar. If a contributor agree makes them more comfortable, it will be worth the head aches. I still think this is not a good idea. I'm not sure what it's gaining us -- are you saying we'd refuse code from people who are unwilling to sign such an agreement? If the intent is to prove something about our codebase, then what about the code that's written before the agreement comes into existence? What happens when OLPC merges some donated code but the Sugar Labs rules demand an agreement for it? I'm struck by the disconnect between Greg's advice of let anyone who says they want to be a member be a member and this new let anyone who enters into a legal agreement with us be a member; my intuition sides on the relaxed side of the continuum. - Chris. -- Chris Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
