Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on Surface Pro (Microsoft Partnership)

2017-04-02 Thread Dave Crossland
Hi I agree completely On Apr 2, 2017 7:52 PM, "Samuel Greenfeld" wrote: > But what is a more proper port to Windows going to give us beyond what > Lionel has already done by including Sugarizer in pretty much every major > app store (including Microsoft's and Apple's)? >

Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on Surface Pro (Microsoft Partnership)

2017-04-02 Thread Samuel Greenfeld
But what is a more proper port to Windows going to give us beyond what Lionel has already done by including Sugarizer in pretty much every major app store (including Microsoft's and Apple's)? There is a cost associated with porting applications and their ongoing maintenance. If Sugar is not

Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on Surface Pro (Microsoft Partnership)

2017-04-02 Thread Tony Anderson
Having Sugar available on Windows 10 is important to establish its reality as an alternative educational platform for educators. Educators in Rwanda and the Philippines accept Windows as the software for vocational preparation to the extent that the XO is not to be used for secondary education

Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on Surface Pro (Microsoft Partnership)

2017-04-02 Thread Samuel Greenfeld
The short answer is yes; there are any number of ways (HTML app, ActivePython .NET port, WSL, GTK for Windows, etc.) to port Sugar to Windows. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. The big question is if any of them are worth it. On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:40 AM, Yatin Maan

Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on Surface Pro (Microsoft Partnership)

2017-04-01 Thread Yatin Maan
Hey, I understand that this is an April fool's joke but with introduction on "Windows subsystem for Linux (WSL)"[1] I was wondering whether we might be able to directly run sugar on Windows 10. Someone here [2] even managed to get Unity and Xfce on WSL so I think it might actually be possible to

Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on Surface Pro (Microsoft Partnership)

2017-04-01 Thread Samuel Greenfeld
No; with all the thoughts of porting XOs to Fedora.next and having to look into ActivePython and such, I never got a chance to look into a proper Sugar .NET conversion. Besides with Sugarizer, we do not need a third language to maintain all the activities in. (It's amazing what you can do in

Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on Surface Pro (Microsoft Partnership)

2017-04-01 Thread Samson Goddy
Look nice, that is awesome. Did you finish it? On Apr 1, 2017 10:19 PM, "Samuel Greenfeld" wrote: > Looking around, I found the following code online: > > http://www.greenfeld.org/1April2017/SugarNET.png > > It doesn't seem to do much more than my previous port did [*],

Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on Surface Pro (Microsoft Partnership)

2017-04-01 Thread Samuel Greenfeld
Looking around, I found the following code online: http://www.greenfeld.org/1April2017/SugarNET.png It doesn't seem to do much more than my previous port did [*], but it at least compiles. [*] http://www.greenfeld.org/1April2011/ On Sat, Apr 1, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Samson Goddy