Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

Hi Dave, Maybe the web platform is a bad bet. Maybe Qt is a bad bet. Maybe Gtk+ is a bad bet. What. A. Shame. But Gtk+ is actually fine. It runs fast enough, it doesn't make users complain (or at least I haven't heard them), it has a nice api, and there is active development. If we

[Sugar-devel] metacity is not reaped, bug #4958

Hi, I was looking at this bug: https://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/4958 How can I create the bug on my machine to test? Even though I created a patch, can you please verify: https://github.com/ManashRaja/sugar/commit/d1d3c852adb6a9a2c10942ed6a96f2c4bb7ed61b Thanks Manash

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

Greeting to all, I would like to add a few thoughts. I am a new member to the community and from my personal experience I found that when it comes to contribution, it is quite difficult at the beginning to align with the vision of Sugar, the trend and to understand which area of development is

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

My understanding is that Microsoft started a project at a school in Rwanda. However, the implementing team later discarded the XOs, purchased conventional laptops and used Windows in the school. Note: (1) at the time Microsoft was walking away from XP and (2) Microsoft never offered

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:33:44PM -0400, Dave Crossland wrote: > Interestingly OLPC also offer XO-4s today with either Fedora+Sugar, > or Android, or Windows XP. No, we only build them with Fedora + Sugar + Gnome. Customer may load Android after delivery. Windows XP is not on offer for XO-4.

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

Actually 60 but who's counting. Tony On 04/20/2016 10:53 AM, Walter Bender wrote: On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Dave Crossland > wrote: [snip] This year Sugar Labs had around 40 GSOC applications, and got 6 slots, and on Friday the

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

On 19 April 2016 at 23:14, Justin Overton wrote: > I did look to see if I could find a way to buy an XO-4, but I ended up > rooting my chromebook instead. It mostly runs fine on the chromebook, but > several of the apps don't work. EToys, Speech, and a couple of others.

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

Hi! I'm adding back the list - I feel annoyed that the SL lists are currently configured for reply-to-sender-only, but the systems team rejected my proposal to change this. Does it bother you? :) The other question I'm curious to ask you is, would you buy an

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 10:33 PM, Dave Crossland wrote: > [snip] > > This year Sugar Labs had around 40 GSOC applications, and got 6 slots, and > on Friday the proposal selections will be announced. > Actually 62 applications. > [snip] > -- > Cheers > Dave > >

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

On 19 April 2016 at 22:19, Tony Anderson wrote: > Sebastian Silva has just given us a way to leverage the library of Sugar > activities outside of Sugar, another way to extend the benefits of the > Sugar community. This is

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

Speaking only for myself. In origin, Sugar was the software provided with the OLPC laptop. It has become obvious that in the long run, Sugar must be able to serve more than the XO platform. I suspect Sugar will need to be viewed as a software project which supports multiple platforms including

Re: [Sugar-devel] Vision

Good question, Justin. Yes, there is a vision. The draft https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Vision_proposal_2016 does talk about "every computer device, from desktops and laptops to tablets and smartphones". I work for OLPC. While OLPC has contributed to make sure Sugar works on OLPC hardware, it

Re: [Sugar-devel] All Things Open

Greg DeKoenigsberg was at last year's event and his company was acquired by Red Hat at the time - se he may again be a RedHatter. Tony On 04/20/2016 07:38 AM, Walter Bender wrote: I could ask around with some Red Hat folks if they think it would be a good idea. -walter On Tue, Apr 19, 2016

Re: [Sugar-devel] All Things Open

I could ask around with some Red Hat folks if they think it would be a good idea. -walter On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Tony Anderson wrote: > My impression last year is that there were numerous tracks and education > topics were welcome. Agreed the audience is

Re: [Sugar-devel] All Things Open

Hi Tony, my impression is that All Things Open is more business-oriented... "in the enterprise" We don't have a vision or roadmap yet, which makes that a tight deadline. Sean P.S. "If" the conference will be maintained in NC... the new discriminatory legislation enacted there has created a

[Sugar-devel] All Things Open

Sean I received notice of the All Things Open conference in Raleigh in October. Speaker deadline is May 6. Do you think we could mount a presentation on the 'vision of Sugar'. See http://us3.campaign-archive2.com/?u=fa12020840ae564ac627b96ce=ab214fc4ba=80d66756e4. I attended last year. The

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Marketing] Fwd: GSoC 2016 Website Redesign

On 19 April 2016 at 15:01, Sanchit Bansal wrote: > How do you guys like the slider to the show the three main images of the > website or I should do something else ? > > What do you think ? > If the images are in a scrolling page that is simple - like today -

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Marketing] Fwd: GSoC 2016 Website Redesign

Great Research, Will help a lot in building this. How do you guys like the slider to the show the three main images of the website or I should do something else ? What do you think ? On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:17 AM, Dave Crossland wrote: > > On 19 April 2016 at 04:47, Sean

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Marketing] Fwd: GSoC 2016 Website Redesign

On 19 April 2016 at 04:47, Sean DALY wrote: > Hopefully the MIT Sloan conclusions will be taken into account > Yes, https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Marketing_Team#MIT_Sloan_MarketLab_Study is GREAT! :) ___ Sugar-devel mailing list

Re: [Sugar-devel] Fwd: GSoC 2016 Website Redesign

Hello On 18 April 2016 at 18:21, Sam P. wrote: > Content is genuinely the most important. No matter how nice your design is, > no new visitor will be able to get what sugarlabs is by looking at your > site - it simply doesn't say it! Sure Sam , I will take this into

[Sugar-devel] Fwd: GSoC 2016 Website Redesign

Developer discussion about SL brand identity. Hopefully the MIT Sloan conclusions will be taken into account Sean -- Forwarded message -- From: Dave Crossland Date: Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:37 AM Subject: Re: [Sugar-devel] GSoC 2016 Website Redesign To: Juan