Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
Morgan, This is *exactly* what I was looking for, thanks. As a bonus I can get rid of the "keep" button as well, which is of no use to me. James Simmons Morgan Collett wrote: On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 01:21, Wade Brainerd wrote: There might be something in the Sugar Almanac, see http://sugarlabs.org/go/ActivityTeam/Resources for a link. Alternately, an example of how to disable sharing is here: http://git.sugarlabs.org/projects/math/repos/mainline/blobs/master/mathactivity.py#line75 Note to Sugar toolkit guys, I'd love to have a formal API to indicate "collaboration not supported". Another method of removing the sharing control: http://git.sugarlabs.org/projects/terminal/repos/mainline/blobs/master/terminal.py#line61 Regards Morgan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 01:21, Wade Brainerd wrote: > There might be something in the Sugar Almanac, > see http://sugarlabs.org/go/ActivityTeam/Resources for a link. > Alternately, an example of how to disable sharing is here: > http://git.sugarlabs.org/projects/math/repos/mainline/blobs/master/mathactivity.py#line75 > Note to Sugar toolkit guys, I'd love to have a formal API to indicate > "collaboration not supported". Another method of removing the sharing control: http://git.sugarlabs.org/projects/terminal/repos/mainline/blobs/master/terminal.py#line61 Regards Morgan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 9:26 PM, Gary C Martin wrote: > Happy to be proven wrong, and I guess it could be a Sugar feature not really > intended for XOs. Let's let the flowers bloom: I don't doubt that there are many ways to make *better* collaboration, on an activity-by-activity basis. But VNC is something that can be created as a common baseline. Let's start by doing that, and improve it on a case-by-case basis, instead of having *no collaboration* as our baseline. FWIW, I second Carol's comments: VNC works quite nicely on fast local networks, such as direction connections between XOs, and I've used it on clients as simple as a Palm Pilot and a Mac SE/30. Reducing graphic busy-ness and palette size helps a lot! Also: don't run xvncviewer remotely: VNC is network efficient, but the way its X client uses the network between it and the X server is definitely *not*! --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
Gary, I've used it for many years on machines much less powerful than the XO, often for an sshable net meeting with multiple participants, and I think you might need to do a few simple things to speed it up for yourself. (Remove fancy graphic backdrop, try for a smaller palette). These things are pretty congruent with the normal state of the desktop on the XO. On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Gary C Martin wrote: > On 3 Feb 2009, at 01:02, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Eben Eliason wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz > >> wrote: > > In my mind, this would work perfectly with the above scheme, > > whereby > > any activity that already has max_participants in it could be > > viewed > > in that manner. > >> I don't see why any Activity should be excluded from such VNC > >> sharing, > >> regardless of max_participants. > >> > >>> Of course not. I didn't mean to imply such a limitation; only that > >>> the VNC solution would be the /only/ option after some participants > >>> limit was reached. That is, you could either "Join" or "Watch" any > >>> shared activity, but the "Join" option would disappear once > >>> "full"..."Watch" would remain. It's possible we'd have an upper > >>> bound > >>> on the number of people who could watch as well, but I don't think > >>> that's an activity-specific parameter. > > > > Oh! That's beautiful. > > > > Let's do that. > > I don't mean to rain on the parade here, but am I the only one who > finds VNC slow even on high spec equipment over a dedicated broadband > connection? I do use it occasionally for remote support, so it does > have its uses – but a handful of XOs in the same wireless spectrum? > Ouch. From a technical stand point VNC is going to be almost always > more memory hungry, more cpu hungry, and more bandwidth hungry than > most activity collaborations, seems to be an overly hopeful > collaboration method to fallback on. > > Happy to be proven wrong, and I guess it could be a Sugar feature not > really intended for XOs. > > Regards, > --Gary > > > - --Ben > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) > > > > iEYEARECAAYFAkmHl60ACgkQUJT6e6HFtqTXXACdH1WGy6vrO8JibUPy+AbPXQs0 > > 5X0An1Y3zcLXrr3kP9itQ8pUHZ7ujjpD > > =YKXn > > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > ___ > > Sugar-devel mailing list > > sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org > > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > ___ > Devel mailing list > Devel@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > -- "Don't think for a minute that power concedes. We have to work like our future depends on it." -- Barack Obama ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
On 3 Feb 2009, at 01:02, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Eben Eliason wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz >> wrote: > In my mind, this would work perfectly with the above scheme, > whereby > any activity that already has max_participants in it could be > viewed > in that manner. >> I don't see why any Activity should be excluded from such VNC >> sharing, >> regardless of max_participants. >> >>> Of course not. I didn't mean to imply such a limitation; only that >>> the VNC solution would be the /only/ option after some participants >>> limit was reached. That is, you could either "Join" or "Watch" any >>> shared activity, but the "Join" option would disappear once >>> "full"..."Watch" would remain. It's possible we'd have an upper >>> bound >>> on the number of people who could watch as well, but I don't think >>> that's an activity-specific parameter. > > Oh! That's beautiful. > > Let's do that. I don't mean to rain on the parade here, but am I the only one who finds VNC slow even on high spec equipment over a dedicated broadband connection? I do use it occasionally for remote support, so it does have its uses – but a handful of XOs in the same wireless spectrum? Ouch. From a technical stand point VNC is going to be almost always more memory hungry, more cpu hungry, and more bandwidth hungry than most activity collaborations, seems to be an overly hopeful collaboration method to fallback on. Happy to be proven wrong, and I guess it could be a Sugar feature not really intended for XOs. Regards, --Gary > - --Ben > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkmHl60ACgkQUJT6e6HFtqTXXACdH1WGy6vrO8JibUPy+AbPXQs0 > 5X0An1Y3zcLXrr3kP9itQ8pUHZ7ujjpD > =YKXn > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 1:33 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: > OK, but as an Activity author I might like to specify that cap at runtime, > depending on many things, such as the size of the document. ... start collaborating on an empty Write.xo doc, and shed participants dynamically as the document grows ;-) m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Eben Eliason wrote: > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz > wrote: In my mind, this would work perfectly with the above scheme, whereby any activity that already has max_participants in it could be viewed in that manner. > I don't see why any Activity should be excluded from such VNC sharing, > regardless of max_participants. > >> Of course not. I didn't mean to imply such a limitation; only that >> the VNC solution would be the /only/ option after some participants >> limit was reached. That is, you could either "Join" or "Watch" any >> shared activity, but the "Join" option would disappear once >> "full"..."Watch" would remain. It's possible we'd have an upper bound >> on the number of people who could watch as well, but I don't think >> that's an activity-specific parameter. Oh! That's beautiful. Let's do that. - --Ben -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmHl60ACgkQUJT6e6HFtqTXXACdH1WGy6vrO8JibUPy+AbPXQs0 5X0An1Y3zcLXrr3kP9itQ8pUHZ7ujjpD =YKXn -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Eben Eliason wrote: >> I think that the addition of a new property in the activity.info file >> would be logical here. Make it an integer indicating the maximum >> number of supported participants. > > OK, but as an Activity author I might like to specify that cap at runtime, > depending on many things, such as the size of the document. I might even > want to let the initiator choose the number of participants. I think we > should also have a runtime API, so that the cap that can be varied at any > time. That's a good observation. You're right; I was seeing hard limits, but soft limits could certainly be implemented via some API that Sugar could call into to retrieve the info. The static declaration could be used as the fallback. > In fact, it might be nice to have a a generic solution for defining config > variables that can be controlled either statically or at runtime. We have > mentioned a wide variety of such variables, including things like whether > screen rotation is supported. Right. >> Scott (CC'd) has already come up with some really nice proposals for >> adding VNC as an alternate colaboration mechanism for all activities. >> In my mind, this would work perfectly with the above scheme, whereby >> any activity that already has max_participants in it could be viewed >> in that manner. > > I don't see why any Activity should be excluded from such VNC sharing, > regardless of max_participants. Of course not. I didn't mean to imply such a limitation; only that the VNC solution would be the /only/ option after some participants limit was reached. That is, you could either "Join" or "Watch" any shared activity, but the "Join" option would disappear once "full"..."Watch" would remain. It's possible we'd have an upper bound on the number of people who could watch as well, but I don't think that's an activity-specific parameter. - Eben > - --Ben > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAkmHkNIACgkQUJT6e6HFtqQBlQCdF4AhUy+NWkwYqVR/qMyl/m2H > UpAAniXtXxWRQuM8o8iqtiyJ0uB4o05Z > =BI5d > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Is it possible to disable "sharing" for an Activity?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Eben Eliason wrote: > I think that the addition of a new property in the activity.info file > would be logical here. Make it an integer indicating the maximum > number of supported participants. OK, but as an Activity author I might like to specify that cap at runtime, depending on many things, such as the size of the document. I might even want to let the initiator choose the number of participants. I think we should also have a runtime API, so that the cap that can be varied at any time. In fact, it might be nice to have a a generic solution for defining config variables that can be controlled either statically or at runtime. We have mentioned a wide variety of such variables, including things like whether screen rotation is supported. > Scott (CC'd) has already come up with some really nice proposals for > adding VNC as an alternate colaboration mechanism for all activities. > In my mind, this would work perfectly with the above scheme, whereby > any activity that already has max_participants in it could be viewed > in that manner. I don't see why any Activity should be excluded from such VNC sharing, regardless of max_participants. - --Ben -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkmHkNIACgkQUJT6e6HFtqQBlQCdF4AhUy+NWkwYqVR/qMyl/m2H UpAAniXtXxWRQuM8o8iqtiyJ0uB4o05Z =BI5d -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel