[Sugar-devel] improving graphics performance

2009-06-14 Thread Tomeu Vizoso
Hi, if anyone has the time and interest to improve graphics performance of Sugar on the XO and other limited hardware, please consider reading this post from Cairo's Carl Worth: http://cworth.org/intel/performance_measurement/ Would be specially valuable to do separate profiling of librsvg.

Re: [Sugar-devel] possible foundation for an email activity

2009-06-14 Thread Alexander Boström
Den 2009-05-24 07:46, Albert Cahalan skrev: Evolution also happens to mangle mail in ways that hinder full participation in many Open Source mailing lists. That's Thunderbird (which I'm using right now), I think. The Evolution email editor is a wonderful compared to Thunderbird's. /abo

Re: [Sugar-devel] GSoC Groupthink Update: SharedTextDemo-2

2009-06-14 Thread Bobby Powers
On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 3:45 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartzbmsch...@fas.harvard.edu wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 SharedTextDemo-2 is now available at http://dev.laptop.org/~bemasc/SharedTextDemo-2.xo. This version is functionally identical to (and even protocol-compatible

Re: [Sugar-devel] GSoC Groupthink Update: SharedTextDemo-2

2009-06-14 Thread Benjamin M. Schwartz
Bobby Powers wrote: Sounds great! Are you expecting more performance gains in the future? Only if someone implements them! Is there a git repository somewhere I could check out? Yes! http://dev.laptop.org/git/projects/dobject/ --Ben signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [Sugar-devel] GSoC Groupthink Update: SharedTextDemo-2

2009-06-14 Thread Gary C Martin
On 15 Jun 2009, at 01:59, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: Bobby Powers wrote: Sounds great! Are you expecting more performance gains in the future? Only if someone implements them! Definitely has my interest!! Useful collaboration is _really_ tough, your Groupthink potentially offers a

Re: [Sugar-devel] GSoC Groupthink Update: SharedTextDemo-2

2009-06-14 Thread Benjamin M. Schwartz
Gary C Martin wrote: On 15 Jun 2009, at 01:59, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: Bobby Powers wrote: Sounds great! Are you expecting more performance gains in the future? Only if someone implements them! Definitely has my interest!! Useful collaboration is _really_ tough, your Groupthink