sugar 0.83 in joyride

Dear Masters of Joyride, have built updated sugar rpms and they seem to work fine on last joyrides. Built locally these rpms. Anybody sees any problem if I build them in the OLPC-3 branch? Or should be in F9? Or F10 if we intend to switch soon? What if we decide to do a 8.2.1 release?

Re: sugar 0.83 in joyride

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Masters of Joyride, have built updated sugar rpms and they seem to work fine on last joyrides. Marco pointed me out in #sugar that work fine may need some clarification. In fact, the following things are known to be

Please add the core SCIM packages into joyride

Hello, Please add the following core SCIM packages to Joyride: The following are in my public_rpms (I had to strip out some dependencies to avoid 100 megs of extra stuff): scim-libs-1.4.7-31.fc10.i386.rpm scim-1.4.7-31.fc10.i386.rpm scim-gtk-1.4.7-31.fc10.i386.rpm The rest can be pulled in from

Re: [sugar] sugar 0.83 in joyride

Tomeu Vizoso wrote: On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Masters of Joyride, have built updated sugar rpms and they seem to work fine on last joyrides. Marco pointed me out in #sugar that work fine may need some clarification. In fact, the following

What's cooking inthe XS pot -- 2008-11-05

I've been a bit silent lately, as I've just arrived to Boston and I'm trying to get organised. My plans right now are roughly - last round of testing of xs-0.5 - and release! (I know it's delayed -- blame the moodlemoots on one hand, and the deep work Douglas has done in understanding

Some 9.1/XO-camp-ish topics (Re: What's cooking inthe XS pot -- 2008-11-05)

In the middle of my XS-focused post, there are a few notes on key conversations I hope to have this week with XO-focused folks... with XOcamp, without it, I don't care, seize the day: At 1CC there is quite a bit of interest in 9.1 planning. Even with xocamp delayed, I do want to get some

[Server-devel] ejabberd - limiting mem footprint notes

This is part of our post-0.5 quest to make sure all compoenents degrade nicely in large scale setups. One of the key strategies is to cap the number of clients we serve if that helps control memory footprint. That is because network service workloads (and all the XS tasks are network services)

[Server-devel] ejabberd and roster mgmt

More post xs-0.5 stuff that is fresh in my mind from discussions in the last few days. In schools with 3K XOs, our '@all@' roster is no longer useful, and actually messes up memory usage, bandwidth and the display on the client side. Wad has proposed running several ejabberd's as an interim

[Server-devel] Custom roster behaviour without writing your own mod_roster

Hi all! For the OLPC School Server we are using ejabberd extensively -- so let me preface this with a heartfelt *thanks* to all the dev team and contributors for a fantastic piece of software. One of the things ejabberd is doing for us is roster and presence mgmt, which right now boils down to

8.2-767 Mesh vs. AP on same channel wierdness

Hi, Just wanted to ping the dev list regarding the current expected 8.2-767 behaviour for Mesh vs. AP use. I now have 3 XOs here for testing all running 8.2-767, usually trying** to keep all 3 attached to an AP I have here for internet access. All 3 also have a blank jabber server set so

Re: What's cooking inthe XS pot -- 2008-11-05

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: I've been a bit silent lately, as I've just arrived to Boston and I'm trying to get organised. My plans right now are roughly - last round of testing of xs-0.5 - and release! (I know it's delayed -- blame the

Re: What's cooking inthe XS pot -- 2008-11-05

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 3:31 PM, David Farning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you think xs will be stable enough to do a server related book sprint at Fedora/OLPC/Sugar (FOS)con? Is that mid January 09? I'd say 0.6 will be out by then, and should be a reasonable target to start documenting. Some

Click to help Sugar/OLPC | Peru link to help G1G1

Hello Developers, You are all my heroes and always will be! Thank you so much for all the time and sacrifices you have made to use your skills for the benefit of the project. I greatly admire your dedication and what you've been able to achieve. Here's two suggested things to do that could

Re: What's cooking inthe XS pot -- 2008-11-05

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 3:31 PM, David Farning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you think xs will be stable enough to do a server related book sprint at Fedora/OLPC/Sugar (FOS)con? Is that mid January 09? I think so.

XO Future Feature Meeting Minutes - 11/5

Hi All, Several engineers and others met on IRC on Wed. November, 5 to discuss Future Feature planning for the XO. * Agenda: http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2008-November/020918.html This meeting is currently focused on setting the agenda and preparing material for an XO and

RE: 8.2-767 Mesh vs. AP on same channel wierdness

Hi Gary, I will try to reproduce it here at 1cc - looks interesting. Regards, Joe -- Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 19:59:00 + From: Gary C Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 8.2-767 Mesh vs. AP on same channel wierdness To: OLPC Devel devel@lists.laptop.org Cc: sugar List [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Server-devel] What's cooking inthe XS pot -- 2008-11-05

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:25 PM, Martin Langhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 3:31 PM, David Farning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do you think xs will be stable enough to do a server related book sprint at Fedora/OLPC/Sugar (FOS)con? Is that mid January 09? I think so.