Peter: Thanks for your input. I am somewhat at a loss on how to proceed.
*Maybe request Project status, like sugarlabs has granted sdz soas project, for the SDK DVD/CD sets. (this would not get fedora involved directly in supporting it.) *I would volunteer to attempt to keep them current. Is there not a delta function to update only the changed portions of a file? *I have some ideas/possible answers to your concerns, listed below, on how to possibly make the SDK a Soas "feature" * The other Feature request of a custom Browse screen for Soas may achieve similar results for connected users. http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Revised_Browse_default-bookmarks.html Cordially; Tom Gilliard satellit Peter Robinson wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > My initial reaction is "Wow, what a lot of good stuff"! There's a lot > of stuff in here that is a feature in and of itself but (and there's > always a but) I feel the SCK as it stands won't become a 'Feature' of > SoaS. I'll make some bullet points below of my concerns and flesh the > data below. > > * It includes 5 copies of SoaS and related derivatives. > * It includes 140 Activities > * It includes a lot of manual work > * Its MASSIVE! I've seen sizes ranging from 3.2 to 9Gb! We could fit > like 18 versions of the existing SoaSv3 into that! > * included documentation > > So the fleshing out bit: > * 5 copies? > - If we need to ship 5 copies of SoaS we're doing something wrong. > - We don't ship old copies of SoaS in the latest version. Do you see > MS or Apple or Fedora doing that? No! Strawberry is no longer > supported, Blueberry is almost to that state. We don't have the > resources to deal with that and its a support nightmare. It also says > that we don't believe the latest version is the best. > - Size. People want one copy, to do that they don't want to download 5+ > Do I want to make a V3 version only? * A CD is too small, unless there is a series of CD's with an Index (maybe covering each directory on the CD) > * 140 Activities > - No QA. The reason we cut down the Activities is Mirabelle was the > ability to provide well tested working Activities. The issue with Read > proves we had trouble dealing with 10. Doing that with 140+ isn't > sustainable. > - There's no guarantee of the license. We only want to ship free ones. > No flash. No Codecs etc. > - Binary inclusions. Support issues on the current SoaS release. It > causes problems and its hard to QA. See point above. > - Its out of date the moment you ship it > > *I can make a smaller subset of ASLOxo that covers Mirabelle Compatible Applications. http://people.sugarlabs.org/Tgillard/Activities-Index-Mirabell.ods was a first attempt at doing this. I have been editing the ASLO listings based on this testing. *I think ASLO site has to be changed to recognize what version of sugar is requesting .xo downloads and not permit access to those not compatible. (restricted to password access -experimental) > * Manual work. > - We need to automate as much as possible. Manual stuff has 3 main > issues. 1) error prone especially human 2) time consuming 3) QA. > - We want to automate more. Fedora has a feature called AutoQA. We > want to make use of stuff like this. > > * Its massive! > - While the idea is great it generally doesn't work > - DVDs are horrible and likely to break. This is even worse in the > developing world where the "Sneaker Net" still applies because the > conditions are worse. 9Gb keys are still expensive when your in the > developing world where wages are low. > * A series of CD's might cover this -sized for copying to 1-2 GB sticks (see above) > - It is out of date the moment you create it. > - Its large amounts of bandwidth, see 5 copies above. > > * Included documentation > - It is out of date the moment you create it. > - Its static and not dynamic. > - Its generally wrong and out of date > > So that sums up most of my concerns. The main concern is this though > "Its not one feature its a good dozen of them" > > Some of the issues that SCK was made to fix we plan to fix in v4, they > were know issues and done like that for a reason. In the rest of SCK > there's a lot of good stuff that should be individual features in and > of themselves. > > I hope that outlines some of my concerns and why as it stands I don't > believe the SCK can become a "Feature" of SoaS due to it being a super > set there of. > > Peter > > _______________________________________________ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
