On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 06:46:05PM -0500, David Farning wrote:
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:59 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
p.s. it is good that you are being transparent with your
decisions, because that gives you a chance to have them publically
reviewed. ;-)
On Fri, Nov 01,
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:59 PM, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
p.s. it is good that you are being transparent with your decisions,
because that gives you a chance to have them publically reviewed. ;-)
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 12:04:11PM -0500, David Farning wrote:
Thanks for the
Thanks for the update. Currently, AC does not have the credibility to
participate in the design process. Let's give it 2-3 months for AC's
RD team learning how to work effectively with the HTML5+JS team at
SL.
In the first couple of weeks, I expect that this will mostly involve
creating web
p.s. it is good that you are being transparent with your decisions,
because that gives you a chance to have them publically reviewed. ;-)
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 12:04:11PM -0500, David Farning wrote:
Thanks for the update. Currently, AC does not have the credibility to
participate in the
On 1 November 2013 21:59, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
Use this phase of the process as an opportunity for you and your
people to practice communicating with other developers in the
community; and measure the effort in the design process, not the
achievements.
+1
In the first
On 1 November 2013 22:09, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 November 2013 21:59, James Cameron qu...@laptop.org wrote:
Use this phase of the process as an opportunity for you and your
people to practice communicating with other developers in the
community; and measure the effort
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 10:12:52PM +0100, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
I think we are still very early in the life of the web activities
framework. I can't think of a single API that we could consider set
in stones.
Thanks, correction accepted. I was speculating.
--
James Cameron
Excuse me butting in this talk , but as they are addressing the issue of
design, I think it's a good time to reiterate some proposals I have made
several times.
I think Sugar would do very well a change in appearance and in some cases
functionality. I say it should be graphically attractive to
Flavio,
Would be good have concrete proposals about what you think can be improved,
to be discussed point by point.
About a easier implementation of collaboration, we discussed a proposal,
and I think Agustin started a implementation.
Gonzalo
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Flavio Danesse
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote:
Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder:
Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's
poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost,
low-power, connected laptop with content and
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:10:40AM -0700, Sameer Verma wrote:
[...] We are seeing continued adoption of the XO in Rwanda (I hear
Rwanda is 1.75, but not 4) and Australia. [...]
I can confirm that Rwanda is using XO-1.75, not XO-4. You can find
this information, albeit without quantities, in
Hi, Sameer
I've tried to sit on my hands in this discussion. I agree with your
assessment
completely.
I had the opportunity to talk with Ruben Rodriguez at the sprint. He has
Sugar running (under Ubuntu) on a Nexus 7 and on a standard PC. I have
one of each to test this. The Nexus 7 together
On 29 October 2013 20:29, David Farning dfarn...@activitycentral.comwrote:
Phase two -- Let's look at lessons learned from other projects. We can
focus on the road map and product specification. From my experience,
these two piece can provide an anchor for the rest of the project:
1. The act
On 31 October 2013 19:31, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote:
Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder:
Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's
poorest children by providing each
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com wrote:
On 31 October 2013 19:31, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote:
Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder:
Mission Statement: To create
On 1 November 2013 03:22, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Daniel Narvaez dwnarv...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 31 October 2013 19:31, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma sve...@sfsu.edu wrote:
On Oct 31, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:04 AM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical
set of questions which will determine the future viability of Sugar.
If anyone as more
Indeed, deployments (both administrators and users) have much to
contribute to Sugar and the XO's community.
The challenge here was how to get and manage such tremendous amount of
feedback?
Back in November of 2011, we (the Peruvian Local Lab) made an open
call to the community addressing this
On 29/10/2013, at 11:14 AM, David Farning wrote:
As two Data points:
In a private conversation with an Association employee they told me
that they conciser Activity Central a competitor because Activity
Central increased deployments expectations. Their strategy with regard
to Activity Central
Sounds great to me!
On Tuesday, 29 October 2013, David Farning wrote:
I would like to thank everyone who has provided valuable feedback by
participating on this thread.
The three things I am going to takeway from the the thread are:
1. Jame's point about my position about not representing
David,
I agree with James. I never heard something like that, is a big accusation,
and really do not help to move things forward.
As I was in the Sugar team of OLPC Association for the last 3 years,
I am absolutely sure we didn't have any direction about that,
and every decision was based on code
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:01 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I would like to thank everyone who has provided valuable feedback by
participating on this thread.
Ahem. You are casting fugly accusations, you can't stand back and
thank everyone for their valuable feedback.
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:01 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I would like to thank everyone who has provided valuable feedback by
participating on this thread.
The three things I am going to takeway from the the thread are:
1. Jame's point about my position about not
2013/10/29 Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:01 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I would like to thank everyone who has provided valuable feedback by
participating on this thread.
The three things I am going to takeway from the the
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:01 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I would like to thank everyone who has provided valuable feedback by
participating on this thread.
The three things I am going to
About phase two: What is wrong with our actual Feature process?
About topics you are not talking, I would like AC spend some time trying to
push features upstream. That was almost not done in the last year,
and I am working on that right now, but would be good some help from your
part.
Gonzalo
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org wrote:
About phase two: What is wrong with our actual Feature process?
There is nothing wrong with the feature process. The project
specification ( please see
On 23 October 2013 19:51, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:48 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com
wrote:
[snip]
I don't understand what you are asking. Sugar
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical
I don't speak on behalf of the Association, but I think your
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I just wanted to bump this line of questions
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 3:01 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM, David Farning
David wrote:
The degree of openness and transparency is our fundamental
disagreement. Best case is that the status quo works, Sugar Labs
thrives, and I am proven wrong. Worst case is that Sugar adopts to
the changing environment.
I haven't been able to parse this in a way that gives me
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 3:01 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Martin Langhoff
martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Walter Bender
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:14 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 3:01 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Martin Langhoff
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 8:14 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
In a private conversation with an Association employee they told me
that they conciser Activity Central a competitor because Activity
Central increased deployments expectations. Their strategy with regard
to
On 29 October 2013 01:14, David Farning dfarn...@activitycentral.comwrote:
As two Data points:
In a private conversation with an Association employee they told me
that they conciser Activity Central a competitor because Activity
Central increased deployments expectations. Their strategy with
I would like to thank everyone who has provided valuable feedback by
participating on this thread.
The three things I am going to takeway from the the thread are:
1. Jame's point about my position about not representing the median.
Due to my history and role in the ecosystem, I have upset some
I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical
set of questions which will determine the future viability of Sugar.
If anyone as more informed, please correct me if I am sharing
incorrect information:
1. The Association has dropped future development of XO laptops and
Sugar
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical
set of questions which will determine the future viability of Sugar.
If anyone as more informed, please correct me if I am sharing
incorrect
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical
set of questions which will determine the future viability of
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:48 PM, David Farning
dfarn...@activitycentral.com wrote:
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com
wrote:
[snip]
I don't understand what you are asking. Sugar Labs has always had a
policy of working in the open.
The degree of openness
On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Gonzalo Odiard gonz...@laptop.org wrote:
I agree with your analysis about slow deployment updates versus fast
community cycles.
In my view, there are two alternatives:
* We can slow down a little the Sugar cycle, may be doing one release by
year,
but I am
For phase one this openness in communication, I would like to open the
discussion to strategies for working together. My interest is how to
deal with the notion of overlapping yet non-identical goals.
As a case study, let's look at deployment and developer preferences
for stability and
I agree with your analysis about slow deployment updates versus fast
community cycles.
In my view, there are two alternatives:
* We can slow down a little the Sugar cycle, may be doing one release by
year,
but I am not sure if will help. The changes will take more time to go to
the users?
If a
David,
Certainly is good know plans, and started a interesting discussion.
In eduJam and in Montevideo, I was talking with the new AC hackers,
and tried to convince them to work on sugar 0.100 instead of sugar 0.98.
Have a lot of sense try to work in the same code if possible,
and will be good for
Over the past couple of weeks there has been an interesting thread
which started from AC's attempt to clarify our priorities for the next
couple of months. One of the most interesting aspects has been the
interplay between private/political vs. public/vision discussions.
There seem to be several
and I apologize for that.
Unity in diversity is a necessity for the success of global projects
addressing communities and civil society.
It is always great to see all the members of an eco-system working towards
a common goal.
Regards,
Manu
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:26 PM, David
47 matches
Mail list logo
