Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
The second thing is basic UI usability. The pop-around menu border makes the UI thoroughly unusable with the trackpad http://dev.laptop.org/ticket/4910 covers this issue and more. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that Update.2 should be about 3 things: 3) Performance 2) Performance 1) Performance Mechanisms to achieve those performance goals are worthy candidates for a talk! --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
I sense that this is gonna be a looong thread C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that Update.2 should be about 3 things: 3) Performance 2) Performance 1) Performance Mechanisms to achieve those performance goals are worthy candidates for a talk! --scott -- Polychronis Ypodimatopoulos Graduate student Viral Communications MIT Media Lab Tel: +1 (617) 459-6058 http://www.mit.edu/~ypod/ ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
Is still the plan for Update.2 to be about the most urgent needs from the deployments? Tomeu ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is still the plan for Update.2 to be about the most urgent needs from the deployments? Perhaps I wrote the call for papers too narrowly. Certainly every stable release will continue to include fixes for pressing deployment needs, and those will continue to be priorities. But we need to look up from the immediate needs from time to time to ensure we're going in the right long-term direction. So certainly talks based on short-term goals and needs in the field are desired, but the purpose is also to stimulate discussion on long-term needs and planning as well, and then to try to find the roadmap that gets us from our short-term fixes to our long-term goals. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
Could somebody answer these questions? 1. What is the status of zlib - lzo transition in jffs2? 2. What is the status of the new X architecture? (The name is DRM but I am not sure.) 3. What is the status of the shared page python stuff? Will the reference count problem will be solved in Python 3.0? Will it be released in the foreseeable future? C. Scott Ananian wrote: On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Mitch Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that Update.2 should be about 3 things: 3) Performance 2) Performance 1) Performance Mechanisms to achieve those performance goals are worthy candidates for a talk! --scott ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 6:50 PM, NoiseEHC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could somebody answer these questions? 1. What is the status of zlib - lzo transition in jffs2? 2. What is the status of the new X architecture? (The name is DRM but I am not sure.) 3. What is the status of the shared page python stuff? Will the reference count problem will be solved in Python 3.0? Will it be released in the foreseeable future? Can you explain what's that reference count problem or give any pointer? Thanks, Tomeu ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
It is the problem that every page will be modified (and so copied) if it contains a reference count so the metadata effectively cannot be shared. http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2007-September/006617.html Also mentioned in (point 9.) http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/community-news/2007-February/43.html Tomeu Vizoso wrote: On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 6:50 PM, NoiseEHC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could somebody answer these questions? 1. What is the status of zlib - lzo transition in jffs2? 2. What is the status of the new X architecture? (The name is DRM but I am not sure.) 3. What is the status of the shared page python stuff? Will the reference count problem will be solved in Python 3.0? Will it be released in the foreseeable future? Can you explain what's that reference count problem or give any pointer? Thanks, Tomeu ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
Hmm, yesterday I executed free after launching some activities and got this results: http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/sugar/2008-March/004650.html Am I very wrong to think that we can save 3.6MB per python activity instance? Tomeu On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 7:21 PM, NoiseEHC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is the problem that every page will be modified (and so copied) if it contains a reference count so the metadata effectively cannot be shared. http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/2007-September/006617.html Also mentioned in (point 9.) http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/community-news/2007-February/43.html Tomeu Vizoso wrote: On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 6:50 PM, NoiseEHC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could somebody answer these questions? 1. What is the status of zlib - lzo transition in jffs2? 2. What is the status of the new X architecture? (The name is DRM but I am not sure.) 3. What is the status of the shared page python stuff? Will the reference count problem will be solved in Python 3.0? Will it be released in the foreseeable future? Can you explain what's that reference count problem or give any pointer? Thanks, Tomeu ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
Mitch Bradley wrote: I think that Update.2 should be about 3 things: 3) Performance 2) Performance 1) Performance I second that. Update.2 should be about optimizing Sugar and its dependencies, not adding new features. My 2 cents. -- Bryan W. Berry Systems Engineer OLE Nepal, http://www.olenepal.org ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:55 PM, Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is still the plan for Update.2 to be about the most urgent needs from the deployments? Scott - what's the release naming scheme? What will the bugfix release post update.1 be called, versus the next feature release? Personally, have enjoyed using the major.feature.bugfix scheme in Moodle the last few years - people outside the core dev team understand it quite naturally, so I am planning to use it for the XS. After all, the release numbering is a means of communication between the core dev team and users/admins who want to decide whether to install the new release - will it bring new features? is it just bugfixes? is it backwards compatible? are the questions in their mind. I am starting at 0.2 and preparing now 0.3 (to match update.1) with is an incremental feature release. Bugfixes on top of it will be 0.3.1, for example, while I hope 0.4 will bring a couple of new features... and I will reserve the magic 1.0 for a release down the track that we consider to be rock-solid and having a consolidated set of features. A really well tested and polished 0.9.3 or so will become 1.0, the long-term-support version. We'll all go on holidays for a while, and then we'll start again with 1.1 being the first feature-add release towards 2.0 ... cheers, martin -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
On 22.03.2008 00:30, John R.Hogerhuis wrote: I'd agree with Mitch. Performance, or for us, UI responsiveness, the most visible and painful issue being start up time of applications is paramount. My 4-year old, with no cushy performant computer experience, loses interest in the 10 seconds+ it takes to load activities. Even the calculator takes seconds to load. Actions taken in the photo/video recorder do not sync up with sounds and are not proximate enough in time to the UI action. Given that there will be XO machines running Windows (I'm not claiming it will come factory-installed) it will certainly provide for lots of entertainment if Windows runs faster than the current Sugar+Linux environment. Sure, the official mission is “It's an education project, not a laptop project” , but that also means once somebody has a child-friendly UI for Windows with lots of education software working on the laptop, we will have to answer both questions about usability and speed. For that, it would be nice to know where/why most of the time is lost (UI/language/security/...) and whether the losses are unavoidable by design or just chances to improve performance which have not yet been taken due to time constraints. Regards, Carl-Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
On 22.03.2008 02:09, Martin Langhoff wrote: On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if Windows runs faster ... once somebody has a child-friendly UI for Windows You are going from if to when with absolutely no support from facts. Oh, I have seen the huge speed difference between the current UI/environment and a minimalist one (both on real hardware). That's sufficient to question the assertion that Windows would be slower (unless Windows source is really that unoptimized). I agree with John's concern and desire for better performance... concentrating on our users. But maybe a competitor runs faster is not an interesting conversation on the development list. This is the development list, not the sugar list. Technically, Microsoft is not a competitor of development, it only competes with the currently used OS and UI. I can't see another list fitting the debate as well as [EMAIL PROTECTED] Feel free to educate me otherwise. Regards, Carl-Daniel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Call for Papers/Talks/Ideas! Update.2 Mini-Conference
On Fri, 21 Mar 2008, John R.Hogerhuis wrote: I'd agree with Mitch. Performance, or for us, UI responsiveness, the most visible and painful issue being start up time of applications is paramount. My 4-year old, with no cushy performant computer experience, loses interest in the 10 seconds+ it takes to load activities. Even the calculator takes seconds to load. Actions taken in the photo/video recorder do not sync up with sounds and are not proximate enough in time to the UI action. The second thing is basic UI usability. The pop-around menu border makes the UI thoroughly unusable with the trackpad since focus is lost when you get too close to the edge. My daughter's frustration level shoots through the roof whenever this happens. Maybe that is fixed in a recent release, but the fact that the border pops up when you get anywhere near the edge frustrates my daughter to the point that she finds the trackpad is too hard to use [control]. Pretty much the laptop is on the shelf right now for that reason. I agree with this issue, there is a tweak that you can make to the config to disable this feature. I don't have it handy, but if you search a little you should be able to find it. David Lang Also on UI usability, there are far too many words for a non-reader to use almost all programs. At one point usability for non-readers was a goal, not sure what happened. If those two (albeit broad) areas were dealt with the laptop would come back off the shelf. -- John. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
