XO Special interest group at Sugar Labs

[David Farning]

For the past several months the OLPC/Sugar Labs ecosystem has been
getting requests to provide releases of more recent versions of Sugar
on the XO.

The leading effort in this direction seems to be the F11-XO1 project.
I would like to like to invite F11-XO1 to become part of the XO SIG.
I have been trying to articulate the project goals and gather momentum
across several groups.
1.  OLPC as a downstream.
2. Sugar Labs as a focus point.
3. Various ecosystem leaders to do pilots with current versions of Sugar on XOs.
4. Various testers to provide user level testing.

The goal of this groups is not to _fragment_ the existing efforts.
The goal is bring the various efforts together to form a critical mass
to help pull this propel forward.

david

[Steven M. Parrish]

>  For the past several months the OLPC/Sugar Labs ecosystem has been
>  getting requests to provide releases of more recent versions of Sugar
>  on the XO.
>  
>  The leading effort in this direction seems to be the F11-XO1 project.
>  I would like to like to invite F11-XO1 to become part of the XO SIG.
>  I have been trying to articulate the project goals and gather momentum
>  across several groups.
>  1.  OLPC as a downstream.
>  2. Sugar Labs as a focus point.
>  3. Various ecosystem leaders to do pilots with current versions of Sugar on
>   XOs. 4. Various testers to provide user level testing.
>  
>  The goal of this groups is not to _fragment_ the existing efforts.
>  The goal is bring the various efforts together to form a critical mass
>  to help pull this propel forward.
>  
>  david
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
>  Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>   
As the current maintainer of the "F11 for the XO-1" releases,  I would be 
interested in hearing more about the XO SIG and how the work I am doing can 
benefit the SIG and how the SIG can benefit the work I am doing.  Especially in 
regards to testing.

The original goal of the project was to keep up with the work being done for 
the XO-1.5.  It is important that the 2 releases stay in sync to present a 
consistent experience to the users.  To that end I try and do frequent 
releases, and in fact one is due out this week.
  
I am open to anything that will help both OLPC and Sugar in the hands of more 
users.  

Feel free to contact me off or on list.

Steven

=====================================================
Steven M. Parrish
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gpg fingerprint: 4B6C 8357 059E B7ED 8095 0FD6 1F4B EDA0 A9A6 13C0
http://tuxbrewr.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: SMParrish @ #fedora-kde, #fedora-devel, #fedora-olpc, #sugar

[David Farning]

>  As the current maintainer of the "F11 for the XO-1"
> releases,  I would be
>  interested in hearing more about the XO SIG and how the work I am doing can
>  benefit the SIG and how the SIG can benefit the work I am doing.  Especially in
>  regards to testing.
>
>  The original goal of the project was to keep up with the work being done for
>  the XO-1.5.  It is important that the 2 releases stay in sync to present a
>  consistent experience to the users.  To that end I try and do frequent
>  releases, and in fact one is due out this week.
>
>  I am open to anything that will help both OLPC and Sugar in the hands of more
>  users.
>
>  Feel free to contact me off or on list.
>
>  Steven 
Thanks Steven,

It has taken me a while to pull this together.

Based on feedback from you and others, it looks like the best way a
Sugar Labs SIG/Project can help the ecosystem is to work with you to
create frequent 'upstream' releases for the XO and then gather high
quality feedback by engaging testers.

Would you be willing to lead me through the process of creating builds
so that I can document your procedures in order to make it easier for
other to become involved?

So far we have buy in from the olpc contributors program in the form
of developer machines.

david

[Peter Robinson]

Hi David,

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:48 PM, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt; wrote:
>  For the past several months the OLPC/Sugar Labs ecosystem has been
>  getting requests to provide releases of more recent versions of Sugar
>  on the XO.
>
>  The leading effort in this direction seems to be the F11-XO1 project.
>  I would like to like to invite F11-XO1 to become part of the XO SIG.
>  I have been trying to articulate the project goals and gather momentum
>  across several groups.
>  1.  OLPC as a downstream.
>  2. Sugar Labs as a focus point.
>  3. Various ecosystem leaders to do pilots with current versions of Sugar on XOs.
>  4. Various testers to provide user level testing.
>
>  The goal of this groups is not to _fragment_ the existing efforts.
>  The goal is bring the various efforts together to form a critical mass
>  to help pull this propel forward. 
As far as I'm aware there is no F11-XO1 project, I'm aware of a couple
of different projects to get the latest Sugar releases on the XO.
- The SoaS on XO which is being run my Martin Dengler in conjunction
with SoaS and SL (that's where its all hosted).
- The OLPC project to get Fedora 11 on both the XO-1.5 and XO-1 which
is being handled by Steven M. Parrish (and Daniel Drake / Chris Ball)

Both projects are cross pollinated and use components of work done by
both as well as myself and other Fedora upstream people. I don't
believe there's much difference between them as where possible I
believe most stuff is pushed upsteam. There is no current Fedora based
project working on this directly due to the down stream projects.

I have my own build that I use but that isn't generally published and
is mostly to test core fedora for dependency bloat and breakages.

I suggest you speak with the parties mentioned above for further information.

Peter

[David Farning]

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hi David,
>
>  On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:48 PM, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt; wrote:
> > For the past several months the OLPC/Sugar Labs ecosystem has been
> > getting requests to provide releases of more recent versions of Sugar
> > on the XO.
> >
> > The leading effort in this direction seems to be the F11-XO1 project.
> > I would like to like to invite F11-XO1 to become part of the XO SIG.
> > I have been trying to articulate the project goals and gather momentum
> > across several groups.
> > 1.  OLPC as a downstream.
> > 2. Sugar Labs as a focus point.
> > 3. Various ecosystem leaders to do pilots with current versions of Sugar on XOs.
> > 4. Various testers to provide user level testing.
> >
> > The goal of this groups is not to _fragment_ the existing efforts.
> > The goal is bring the various efforts together to form a critical mass
> > to help pull this propel forward.
>
>  As far as I'm aware there is no F11-XO1 project, I'm aware of a couple
>  of different projects to get the latest Sugar releases on the XO.
>  - The SoaS on XO which is being run my Martin Dengler in conjunction
>  with SoaS and SL (that's where its all hosted).
>  - The OLPC project to get Fedora 11 on both the XO-1.5 and XO-1 which
>  is being handled by Steven M. Parrish (and Daniel Drake / Chris Ball) 
This confusion is part of what I am hoping to clear up by create a
single clearly defined project.

I have heard back from many of the people working on the various
projects. the work flow seems to be:
1. Sugar development team creates platform.
2. Fedora packagers package Sugar... and everything else required to
make a disto.
3a. SoaS takes packages and turns them into a Soas image.
3b. Soas is getting pretty well test via test days and deployments
such as the GPA.
4a. Steven take the Fedora packages adds the XO specific bit and turns
them into xo builds.
4b. limited testing for xo builds.

Because of time restrictions, the F11 on XO effort seems to be
reactive.  They take the output from cjb and the fedora packages and
create builds.  I believe that the XO SIG could help generate interest
and attract more developers and testers to the project.

>  Both projects are cross pollinated and use components of work done
> by
>  both as well as myself and other Fedora upstream people. I don't
>  believe there's much difference between them as where possible I
>  believe most stuff is pushed upsteam. There is no current Fedora based
>  project working on this directly due to the down stream projects.
>
>  I have my own build that I use but that isn't generally published and
>  is mostly to test core fedora for dependency bloat and breakages. 
Would it be useful if we started by combining your work and Stevens
into an automatic build system.  This could help identify breakages.
Then we could create a release cycle of alpha and beta and final
releases.

By creating the daily builds and widely broadcasting the various
releases, we can engage a larger community of testers.

david

[Daniel Drake]

2009/9/22 David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;:
>  Because of time restrictions, the F11 on XO effort seems to be
>  reactive.  They take the output from cjb and the fedora packages and
>  create builds. 
Is this a criticism? Are you proposing changing this?

>   I believe that the XO SIG could help generate interest
>  and attract more developers and testers to the project. 
That would be excellent. I'd encourage you to go ahead and create it
so that these resources can start flowing.

I don't think you need to say that F11-for-XO1 is "part of the XO SIG"
-- the fact is that we all have the same goals, and Steven isn't going
to reject help from anyone. This is the same way that the Fedora OLPC
SIG was set up to help OLPC - it provides valuable assistance on
various fronts but the actual "product" was still quite firmly under
the OLPC roof.

If you do want to formalise things and say "this is now a Sugar
project," then that could be done at any point, but this should not be
a barrier to getting people involved right now.

>  Would it be useful if we started by combining your work and Stevens
>  into an automatic build system.  This could help identify breakages.
>  By creating the daily builds and widely broadcasting the various
>  releases, we can engage a larger community of testers. 
The build system would be trivial to automate, and I'd encourage you
to do it as an exercise.
Coordinated testing and a release cycle would of course be very
beneficial to achieving the same quality of release as OLPC has done
previously. It would be of value if you were to set that up. However,
at this stage, I feel that both of those things would be severely
hampered by the slow development pace. I would instead suggest that
you focus on bringing in developers and technical resources at this
point in time, leaving testing and release planning for a little later
down the line.

Thanks for your efforts!

Daniel

[Philip Rhoades]

People,

I have been interested in the OLPC project for some time but only 
decided to try and install the Fedora Sugar desktop when I came across a 
mention of the TamTam application (for creating music).  After a bit of 
messing around I got the Sugar desktop to start (on Fedora 11) but I 
don't get any sound and TamTam is supposed to be already installed but I 
don't see it . . suggestions?

Also, I will probably update to a 64bit machine with a Fedora 12 beta - 
I presume Sugar would work in KVM virtual machine?

Thanks,

Phil.
-- 
Philip Rhoades

GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW	2001
Australia
E-mail:  phil(a)pricom.com.au

TamTam on F11 (was: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar Labs)

[Martin Dengler]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 08:29:01PM +1000, Philip Rhoades wrote:
>  After a bit of messing around I got the Sugar desktop to start (on
>  Fedora 11) but I don't get any sound and TamTam is supposed to be
>  already installed but I don't see it . . suggestions? 
Why do you think TamTam is supposed to be installed?  Is it in
/usr/share/sugar/Activities ?

>  Thanks,
>
>  Phil. 
Martin

TamTam on F11

[Philip Rhoades]

Martin,


On 2009-09-22 20:31, Martin Dengler wrote:
>  On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 08:29:01PM +1000, Philip Rhoades wrote:
> > After a bit of messing around I got the Sugar desktop to start (on
> > Fedora 11) but I don't get any sound and TamTam is supposed to be
> > already installed but I don't see it . . suggestions?
>
>  Why do you think TamTam is supposed to be installed?  Is it in
>  /usr/share/sugar/Activities ? 

I can't find the web page now but someone made a comment that there are 
many "TamTam"s and that they are part of the normal installation . .

Thanks,

Phil.
-- 
Philip Rhoades

GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW	2001
Australia
E-mail:  phil(a)pricom.com.au

[Bernie Innocenti]

El Tue, 22-09-2009 a las 20:29 +1000, Philip Rhoades escribió:
>  I have been interested in the OLPC project for some time but only 
>  decided to try and install the Fedora Sugar desktop when I came across a 
>  mention of the TamTam application (for creating music).  After a bit of 
>  messing around I got the Sugar desktop to start (on Fedora 11) but I 
>  don't get any sound and TamTam is supposed to be already installed but I 
>  don't see it . . suggestions?
>  
>  Also, I will probably update to a 64bit machine with a Fedora 12 beta - 
>  I presume Sugar would work in KVM virtual machine? 
By default, Qemu does not emulate any sound-card.  Could this be part of
the problem?

-- 
   // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/
 \X/  Sugar Labs       - http://sugarlabs.org/

TamTam on F11 (was: XO Special interest group at Sugar Labs)

[Philip Rhoades]

Bernie,


On 2009-09-23 01:44, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
>  El Tue, 22-09-2009 a las 20:29 +1000, Philip Rhoades escribió:
> > I have been interested in the OLPC project for some time but only
> > decided to try and install the Fedora Sugar desktop when I came across a
> > mention of the TamTam application (for creating music).  After a bit of
> > messing around I got the Sugar desktop to start (on Fedora 11) but I
> > don't get any sound and TamTam is supposed to be already installed but I
> > don't see it . . suggestions?
> >
> > Also, I will probably update to a 64bit machine with a Fedora 12 beta -
> > I presume Sugar would work in KVM virtual machine?
>
>  By default, Qemu does not emulate any sound-card.  Could this be part of
>  the problem? 

Currently I am trying to get it working on a non-virtual, Fedora 11 i686 . .

Thanks,

Phil.
-- 
Philip Rhoades

GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW	2001
Australia
E-mail:  phil(a)pricom.com.au

Fedora 11 + Sugar + TamTam

[Philip Rhoades]

People,

Sorry - I should have changed the Subject on the previously sent mail . .

I have been interested in the OLPC project for some time but only 
decided to try and install the Fedora Sugar desktop when I came across a 
mention of the TamTam application (for creating music).  After a bit of 
messing around I got the Sugar desktop to start (on Fedora 11) but I 
don't get any sound and TamTam is supposed to be already installed but I 
don't see it . . suggestions?

Also, I will probably update to a 64bit machine with a Fedora 12 beta - 
I presume Sugar would work in KVM virtual machine?

Thanks,

Phil.
-- 
Philip Rhoades

GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW	2001
Australia
E-mail:  phil(a)pricom.com.au

Fedora 11 + Sugar + TamTam

[Peter Robinson]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Philip Rhoades <phil(a)pricom.com.au&gt; wrote:
>  People,
>
>  Sorry - I should have changed the Subject on the previously sent mail . .
>
>  I have been interested in the OLPC project for some time but only decided to
>  try and install the Fedora Sugar desktop when I came across a mention of the
>  TamTam application (for creating music).  After a bit of messing around I
>  got the Sugar desktop to start (on Fedora 11) but I don't get any sound and
>  TamTam is supposed to be already installed but I don't see it . .
>  suggestions?
>
>  Also, I will probably update to a 64bit machine with a Fedora 12 beta - I
>  presume Sugar would work in KVM virtual machine? 
Sugar works fine in Fedora on 32 or 64 bit on both Fedora 11 and
Fedora 12. You can just do a 'yum groupinstall "Sugar Desktop
Environment" '

Cheers,
Peter

Fedora 11 + Sugar + TamTam

[DancesWithCars]

Sugar is more like an X desktop environment,
so you would have to add another kernel/ iso
to make it worth doing a virtual machine, kvm,
qemu, virtualbox or whatever,

Having multiple desktop environments is
a bit of the issue, afaict.

I'm running 64 bit Fedora Core 11 now,
and have a vanilla sugar desktop from the
yum repos (mentioned elsewhere on this thread)
and a jhbuild later version, which I compile
and run with jhbuild run (or similar, think there
is a sugar- before it) when I want the latest
that is not yet packaged for fedora.

sound works, probably thru pulseaudio
though most of the sound on olpc
is done with csound, afaict.


It would be nice to run 64 bit
and run a little 32 bit image in virtual,
but I've found the virtual environments
not a good, resource intensive etc,
so unless you are hacking the kernel
and don't want to reboot so much,
virtualization is a bit of overkill, imo.

hope that clears a little bit up.
but just what I know and more
people on the list probably know
lots more..


On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Philip Rhoades <phil(a)pricom.com.au&gt; wrote:
>  People,
>
>  Sorry - I should have changed the Subject on the previously sent mail . .
>
>  I have been interested in the OLPC project for some time but only decided to
>  try and install the Fedora Sugar desktop when I came across a mention of the
>  TamTam application (for creating music).  After a bit of messing around I
>  got the Sugar desktop to start (on Fedora 11) but I don't get any sound and
>  TamTam is supposed to be already installed but I don't see it . .
>  suggestions?
>
>  Also, I will probably update to a 64bit machine with a Fedora 12 beta - I
>  presume Sugar would work in KVM virtual machine?
>
>  Thanks,
>
>  Phil.
>  --
>  Philip Rhoades
>
>  GPO Box 3411
>  Sydney NSW      2001
>  Australia
>  E-mail:  phil(a)pricom.com.au
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
>  Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>  


-- 
DancesWithCars
leave the wolves behind ;-)

Fedora 11 + Sugar + TamTam

[Philip Rhoades]

Peter & DancesWithCars,

Thanks for the info!

Phil.


On 2009-09-22 21:23, DancesWithCars wrote:
>  Sugar is more like an X desktop environment,
>  so you would have to add another kernel/ iso
>  to make it worth doing a virtual machine, kvm,
>  qemu, virtualbox or whatever,
>
>  Having multiple desktop environments is
>  a bit of the issue, afaict.
>
>  I'm running 64 bit Fedora Core 11 now,
>  and have a vanilla sugar desktop from the
>  yum repos (mentioned elsewhere on this thread)
>  and a jhbuild later version, which I compile
>  and run with jhbuild run (or similar, think there
>  is a sugar- before it) when I want the latest
>  that is not yet packaged for fedora.
>
>  sound works, probably thru pulseaudio
>  though most of the sound on olpc
>  is done with csound, afaict.
>
>
>  It would be nice to run 64 bit
>  and run a little 32 bit image in virtual,
>  but I've found the virtual environments
>  not a good, resource intensive etc,
>  so unless you are hacking the kernel
>  and don't want to reboot so much,
>  virtualization is a bit of overkill, imo.
>
>  hope that clears a little bit up.
>  but just what I know and more
>  people on the list probably know
>  lots more..
>
>
>  On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Philip Rhoades<phil(a)pricom.com.au>  wrote:
> > People,
> >
> > Sorry - I should have changed the Subject on the previously sent mail . .
> >
> > I have been interested in the OLPC project for some time but only decided to
> > try and install the Fedora Sugar desktop when I came across a mention of the
> > TamTam application (for creating music).  After a bit of messing around I
> > got the Sugar desktop to start (on Fedora 11) but I don't get any sound and
> > TamTam is supposed to be already installed but I don't see it . .
> > suggestions?
> >
> > Also, I will probably update to a 64bit machine with a Fedora 12 beta - I
> > presume Sugar would work in KVM virtual machine?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Phil.
> > --
> > Philip Rhoades
> >
> > GPO Box 3411
> > Sydney NSW      2001
> > Australia
> > E-mail:  phil(a)pricom.com.au
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
> > Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
> >
>
>
>  
-- 
Philip Rhoades

GPO Box 3411
Sydney NSW	2001
Australia
E-mail:  phil(a)pricom.com.au

[Yioryos Asprobounitis]

Now, that's an excellent idea!
However, the crucial thing before any extensive building/testing starts is to address some
major issues that would stop most people from using/testing F11/Sugar.84+. Namely the Xorg
geode video driver, the camera and the battery monitor. These will primarily need
developers. 
Having these components in place then a daily build bug fixing/reporting system would be
more valuable since more people may be willing to give it a try, identifying the
"minor" issues that may eventually allow a deployment-quality release. 
If this is going to be an OLPC, Fedora or SL project, I think is irrelevant. XO-1 is an
EOL machine that runs an OS/UI developed by "some other" organization. Is
literally orphan (besides these limited efforts) so any "adopter" should be
welcome. Whoever sets it up should be good to go. With almost a million users is the
biggest educational linux/sugar implementation and worths every attention.

--- On Mon, 9/21/09, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt; wrote:

>  From: David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar Labs
>  To: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  Cc: "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  Date: Monday, September 21, 2009, 7:36 PM
>  On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM,
>  Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  > Hi David,
>  >
>  > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:48 PM, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >> For the past several months the OLPC/Sugar Labs
>  ecosystem has been
>  >> getting requests to provide releases of more
>  recent versions of Sugar
>  >> on the XO.
>  >>
>  >> The leading effort in this direction seems to be
>  the F11-XO1 project.
>  >> I would like to like to invite F11-XO1 to become
>  part of the XO SIG.
>  >> I have been trying to articulate the project goals
>  and gather momentum
>  >> across several groups.
>  >> 1.  OLPC as a downstream.
>  >> 2. Sugar Labs as a focus point.
>  >> 3. Various ecosystem leaders to do pilots with
>  current versions of Sugar on XOs.
>  >> 4. Various testers to provide user level testing.
>  >>
>  >> The goal of this groups is not to _fragment_ the
>  existing efforts.
>  >> The goal is bring the various efforts together to
>  form a critical mass
>  >> to help pull this propel forward.
>  >
>  > As far as I'm aware there is no F11-XO1 project, I'm
>  aware of a couple
>  > of different projects to get the latest Sugar releases
>  on the XO.
>  > - The SoaS on XO which is being run my Martin Dengler
>  in conjunction
>  > with SoaS and SL (that's where its all hosted).
>  > - The OLPC project to get Fedora 11 on both the XO-1.5
>  and XO-1 which
>  > is being handled by Steven M. Parrish (and Daniel
>  Drake / Chris Ball)
>  
>  This confusion is part of what I am hoping to clear up by
>  create a
>  single clearly defined project.
>  
>  I have heard back from many of the people working on the
>  various
>  projects. the work flow seems to be:
>  1. Sugar development team creates platform.
>  2. Fedora packagers package Sugar... and everything else
>  required to
>  make a disto.
>  3a. SoaS takes packages and turns them into a Soas image.
>  3b. Soas is getting pretty well test via test days and
>  deployments
>  such as the GPA.
>  4a. Steven take the Fedora packages adds the XO specific
>  bit and turns
>  them into xo builds.
>  4b. limited testing for xo builds.
>  
>  Because of time restrictions, the F11 on XO effort seems to
>  be
>  reactive.  They take the output from cjb and the
>  fedora packages and
>  create builds.  I believe that the XO SIG could help
>  generate interest
>  and attract more developers and testers to the project.
>  
>  > Both projects are cross pollinated and use components
>  of work done by
>  > both as well as myself and other Fedora upstream
>  people. I don't
>  > believe there's much difference between them as where
>  possible I
>  > believe most stuff is pushed upsteam. There is no
>  current Fedora based
>  > project working on this directly due to the down
>  stream projects.
>  >
>  > I have my own build that I use but that isn't
>  generally published and
>  > is mostly to test core fedora for dependency bloat and
>  breakages.
>  
>  Would it be useful if we started by combining your work and
>  Stevens
>  into an automatic build system.  This could help
>  identify breakages.
>  Then we could create a release cycle of alpha and beta and
>  final
>  releases.
>  
>  By creating the daily builds and widely broadcasting the
>  various
>  releases, we can engage a larger community of testers.
>  
>  david
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
>  Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>

[DancesWithCars]

I'm not sure about the hardware issues
mentioned below, as new to some of these lists,
but if there is an installed base of XO-1 computers
with special hardware like the touchpad
with 2 extra areas that were never implemented,
why not develop applications for those,
even if the XO-1.5 and XO-2 plans don't
include them?

What are you going to tell the kids
with XO-1s when the XO-1.5 come out?
What is the consolation prize?
Knowing more about it, and
being further up the learning curve?

Also, the battery issues will get worse,
as the hardware gets older, so testing
and determining when need new battery,
as a computer without power isn't much
fun.

Repairing hardware gets more crucial
as machines get older.

Being more inventive with what you have
instead of this is the shiny new machine,
so going deeper into the system,
maybe programming instead of just
using.  Or more time with the learning
content.

Even as a ebook reader, getting new
content, creating new content,
maybe more translating content?

I still think flossmanuals.net
needs indexing and other layout stuff,
under the hood, or however parallel,
LyX makes some assumptions,
and does some of that but not
the wiki and social stuff up top,
so [La]TeX classes and styles might be
a good contribution, finding
objavi and booki source code,
etc...

The requirements for testing a new build
is some extra XO-n hardware for testing,
and a high speed connection, if giving
new .isos builds out to the world,
or access to some place that would,
plus the time and knowledge to
make the changes, find bugs,
report them, etc.

And if 'It's An Eduction Project"
are we teaching self reliance
and how to do builds, make your
own constructionist style or
whatever teaching paradigm fits
the locals?  Or forcing dependence
upon others?

My $.02 USD - costs of ownership/
&& giving back.

On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
<mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote:
>  Now, that's an excellent idea!
>  However, the crucial thing before any extensive building/testing starts is to address
> some major issues that would stop most people from using/testing F11/Sugar.84+. Namely the
> Xorg geode video driver, the camera and the battery monitor. These will primarily need
> developers.
>  Having these components in place then a daily build bug fixing/reporting system would be
> more valuable since more people may be willing to give it a try, identifying the
> "minor" issues that may eventually allow a deployment-quality release.
>  If this is going to be an OLPC, Fedora or SL project, I think is irrelevant. XO-1 is an
> EOL machine that runs an OS/UI developed by "some other" organization. Is
> literally orphan (besides these limited efforts) so any "adopter" should be
> welcome. Whoever sets it up should be good to go. With almost a million users is the
> biggest educational linux/sugar implementation and worths every attention.
>
>  --- On Mon, 9/21/09, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt; wrote:
>
> > From: David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
> > Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar Labs
> > To: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
> > Cc: "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
> > Date: Monday, September 21, 2009, 7:36 PM
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM,
> > Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com&gt;
> > wrote:
> > > Hi David,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:48 PM, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
> > wrote:
> > >> For the past several months the OLPC/Sugar Labs
> > ecosystem has been
> > >> getting requests to provide releases of more
> > recent versions of Sugar
> > >> on the XO.
> > >>
> > >> The leading effort in this direction seems to be
> > the F11-XO1 project.
> > >> I would like to like to invite F11-XO1 to become
> > part of the XO SIG.
> > >> I have been trying to articulate the project goals
> > and gather momentum
> > >> across several groups.
> > >> 1.  OLPC as a downstream.
> > >> 2. Sugar Labs as a focus point.
> > >> 3. Various ecosystem leaders to do pilots with
> > current versions of Sugar on XOs.
> > >> 4. Various testers to provide user level testing.
> > >>
> > >> The goal of this groups is not to _fragment_ the
> > existing efforts.
> > >> The goal is bring the various efforts together to
> > form a critical mass
> > >> to help pull this propel forward.
> > >
> > > As far as I'm aware there is no F11-XO1 project, I'm
> > aware of a couple
> > > of different projects to get the latest Sugar releases
> > on the XO.
> > > - The SoaS on XO which is being run my Martin Dengler
> > in conjunction
> > > with SoaS and SL (that's where its all hosted).
> > > - The OLPC project to get Fedora 11 on both the XO-1.5
> > and XO-1 which
> > > is being handled by Steven M. Parrish (and Daniel
> > Drake / Chris Ball)
> >
> > This confusion is part of what I am hoping to clear up by
> > create a
> > single clearly defined project.
> >
> > I have heard back from many of the people working on the
> > various
> > projects. the work flow seems to be:
> > 1. Sugar development team creates platform.
> > 2. Fedora packagers package Sugar... and everything else
> > required to
> > make a disto.
> > 3a. SoaS takes packages and turns them into a Soas image.
> > 3b. Soas is getting pretty well test via test days and
> > deployments
> > such as the GPA.
> > 4a. Steven take the Fedora packages adds the XO specific
> > bit and turns
> > them into xo builds.
> > 4b. limited testing for xo builds.
> >
> > Because of time restrictions, the F11 on XO effort seems to
> > be
> > reactive.  They take the output from cjb and the
> > fedora packages and
> > create builds.  I believe that the XO SIG could help
> > generate interest
> > and attract more developers and testers to the project.
> >
> > > Both projects are cross pollinated and use components
> > of work done by
> > > both as well as myself and other Fedora upstream
> > people. I don't
> > > believe there's much difference between them as where
> > possible I
> > > believe most stuff is pushed upsteam. There is no
> > current Fedora based
> > > project working on this directly due to the down
> > stream projects.
> > >
> > > I have my own build that I use but that isn't
> > generally published and
> > > is mostly to test core fedora for dependency bloat and
> > breakages.
> >
> > Would it be useful if we started by combining your work and
> > Stevens
> > into an automatic build system.  This could help
> > identify breakages.
> > Then we could create a release cycle of alpha and beta and
> > final
> > releases.
> >
> > By creating the daily builds and widely broadcasting the
> > various
> > releases, we can engage a larger community of testers.
> >
> > david
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
> > Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
> >
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
>  Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>  


-- 
DancesWithCars
leave the wolves behind ;-)

[Yioryos Asprobounitis]

--- On Thu, 9/24/09, DancesWithCars <danceswithcars(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  From: DancesWithCars <danceswithcars(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar Labs
>  To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis" <mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt;
>  Cc: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com, "David Farning"
> <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;, "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  Date: Thursday, September 24, 2009, 6:45 AM
>  I'm not sure about the hardware
>  issues
>  mentioned below, as new to some of these lists,
>  but if there is an installed base of XO-1 computers
>  with special hardware like the touchpad
>  with 2 extra areas that were never implemented,
>  why not develop applications for those,
>  even if the XO-1.5 and XO-2 plans don't
>  include them?
>  
>  What are you going to tell the kids
>  with XO-1s when the XO-1.5 come out?
>  What is the consolation prize?
>  Knowing more about it, and
>  being further up the learning curve?
>  
>  Also, the battery issues will get worse,
>  as the hardware gets older, so testing
>  and determining when need new battery,
>  as a computer without power isn't much
>  fun.
>  
>  Repairing hardware gets more crucial
>  as machines get older.
>  
>  Being more inventive with what you have
>  instead of this is the shiny new machine,
>  so going deeper into the system,
>  maybe programming instead of just
>  using.  Or more time with the learning
>  content.
>  
>  Even as a ebook reader, getting new
>  content, creating new content,
>  maybe more translating content?
>  
>  I still think flossmanuals.net
>  needs indexing and other layout stuff,
>  under the hood, or however parallel,
>  LyX makes some assumptions,
>  and does some of that but not
>  the wiki and social stuff up top,
>  so [La]TeX classes and styles might be
>  a good contribution, finding
>  objavi and booki source code,
>  etc...
>   
These are all very valid points. However, is not clear to me if you imply that they should
be prioritized over the updating of the os/sugar or not. I hope not since some of these
may even benefit from an updated OS (touchpad, battery, other hardware related patches) as
opposed to an unsupported one (Fedora 9). 
On the other hand being a voluntary process is hard to tell to people "you do this
instead of that". You can certainly try to convince them, and I think you do a good
job on that :-) 

>  The requirements for testing a new build
>  is some extra XO-n hardware for testing,
>  and a high speed connection, if giving
>  new .isos builds out to the world,
>  or access to some place that would,
>  plus the time and knowledge to
>  make the changes, find bugs,
>  report them, etc. 
Again I'm not sure what this means. That is trivial? That a "beta" quality
OS should be delivered to the students/deployments and let them debug it? Other?

>  
>  And if 'It's An Eduction Project"
>  are we teaching self reliance
>  and how to do builds, make your
>  own constructionist style or
>  whatever teaching paradigm fits
>  the locals?  Or forcing dependence
>  upon others? 
Again trying to read between the lines... I'm sure that "locals" have their
hands full trying to make the best of the available hardware/software, adapt it to their
needs and build their own apps when needed. I would also guess that if the current Fedora
9-based OS is a blocker to paramount needs they may try to update it themselves.
However, providing a better option as the F11/Sugar0.84+ is, in no way is in contrast with
the "educational project". For one is _not_ a "computer education"
project. So "upgrade your OS", is by no means a priority. Is welcome, but in no
way required. 
Expecting a 9-12 years old on the other hand to come up with the solutions is conceivable
but nothing to depend on, either. 
Finally the fact that if you give someone a fishing pole will eat fish all his/her life,
does not preclude that you can not give them a fishing boat to get bigger fish, nor it
implies they should built one. 
They may as well build a boat by themselves but the goal here is to get as much and as
good fish as possible given the needs. 
Finally self reliance is an important factor. However like everything else in teaching it
must be build gradually, in the right order and by experience. Assigning tasks that will
be never completed guaranties that you will build self depreciation rather than self
reliance. 
And as you said "is an educational project".      

If I read your comments wrong, my apologies.

>  
>  My $.02 USD - costs of ownership/
>  && giving back.
>  
>  On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
>  <mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  > Now, that's an excellent idea!
>  > However, the crucial thing before any extensive
>  building/testing starts is to address some major issues that
>  would stop most people from using/testing F11/Sugar.84+.
>  Namely the Xorg geode video driver, the camera and the
>  battery monitor. These will primarily need developers.
>  > Having these components in place then a daily build
>  bug fixing/reporting system would be more valuable since
>  more people may be willing to give it a try, identifying the
>  "minor" issues that may eventually allow a
>  deployment-quality release.
>  > If this is going to be an OLPC, Fedora or SL project,
>  I think is irrelevant. XO-1 is an EOL machine that runs an
>  OS/UI developed by "some other" organization. Is literally
>  orphan (besides these limited efforts) so any "adopter"
>  should be welcome. Whoever sets it up should be good to go.
>  With almost a million users is the biggest educational
>  linux/sugar implementation and worths every attention.
>  >
>  > --- On Mon, 9/21/09, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >
>  >> From: David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  >> Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar
>  Labs
>  >> To: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  >> Cc: "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  >> Date: Monday, September 21, 2009, 7:36 PM
>  >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM,
>  >> Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  >> wrote:
>  >> > Hi David,
>  >> >
>  >> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:48 PM, David
>  Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  >> wrote:
>  >> >> For the past several months the
>  OLPC/Sugar Labs
>  >> ecosystem has been
>  >> >> getting requests to provide releases of
>  more
>  >> recent versions of Sugar
>  >> >> on the XO.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> The leading effort in this direction
>  seems to be
>  >> the F11-XO1 project.
>  >> >> I would like to like to invite F11-XO1 to
>  become
>  >> part of the XO SIG.
>  >> >> I have been trying to articulate the
>  project goals
>  >> and gather momentum
>  >> >> across several groups.
>  >> >> 1.  OLPC as a downstream.
>  >> >> 2. Sugar Labs as a focus point.
>  >> >> 3. Various ecosystem leaders to do pilots
>  with
>  >> current versions of Sugar on XOs.
>  >> >> 4. Various testers to provide user level
>  testing.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> The goal of this groups is not to
>  _fragment_ the
>  >> existing efforts.
>  >> >> The goal is bring the various efforts
>  together to
>  >> form a critical mass
>  >> >> to help pull this propel forward.
>  >> >
>  >> > As far as I'm aware there is no F11-XO1
>  project, I'm
>  >> aware of a couple
>  >> > of different projects to get the latest Sugar
>  releases
>  >> on the XO.
>  >> > - The SoaS on XO which is being run my Martin
>  Dengler
>  >> in conjunction
>  >> > with SoaS and SL (that's where its all
>  hosted).
>  >> > - The OLPC project to get Fedora 11 on both
>  the XO-1.5
>  >> and XO-1 which
>  >> > is being handled by Steven M. Parrish (and
>  Daniel
>  >> Drake / Chris Ball)
>  >>
>  >> This confusion is part of what I am hoping to
>  clear up by
>  >> create a
>  >> single clearly defined project.
>  >>
>  >> I have heard back from many of the people working
>  on the
>  >> various
>  >> projects. the work flow seems to be:
>  >> 1. Sugar development team creates platform.
>  >> 2. Fedora packagers package Sugar... and
>  everything else
>  >> required to
>  >> make a disto.
>  >> 3a. SoaS takes packages and turns them into a Soas
>  image.
>  >> 3b. Soas is getting pretty well test via test days
>  and
>  >> deployments
>  >> such as the GPA.
>  >> 4a. Steven take the Fedora packages adds the XO
>  specific
>  >> bit and turns
>  >> them into xo builds.
>  >> 4b. limited testing for xo builds.
>  >>
>  >> Because of time restrictions, the F11 on XO effort
>  seems to
>  >> be
>  >> reactive.  They take the output from cjb and the
>  >> fedora packages and
>  >> create builds.  I believe that the XO SIG could
>  help
>  >> generate interest
>  >> and attract more developers and testers to the
>  project.
>  >>
>  >> > Both projects are cross pollinated and use
>  components
>  >> of work done by
>  >> > both as well as myself and other Fedora
>  upstream
>  >> people. I don't
>  >> > believe there's much difference between them
>  as where
>  >> possible I
>  >> > believe most stuff is pushed upsteam. There
>  is no
>  >> current Fedora based
>  >> > project working on this directly due to the
>  down
>  >> stream projects.
>  >> >
>  >> > I have my own build that I use but that
>  isn't
>  >> generally published and
>  >> > is mostly to test core fedora for dependency
>  bloat and
>  >> breakages.
>  >>
>  >> Would it be useful if we started by combining your
>  work and
>  >> Stevens
>  >> into an automatic build system.  This could help
>  >> identify breakages.
>  >> Then we could create a release cycle of alpha and
>  beta and
>  >> final
>  >> releases.
>  >>
>  >> By creating the daily builds and widely
>  broadcasting the
>  >> various
>  >> releases, we can engage a larger community of
>  testers.
>  >>
>  >> david
>  >>
>  >> _______________________________________________
>  >> Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
>  >> Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>  >>
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
>  > Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>  >
>  
>  
>  
>  -- 
>  DancesWithCars
>  leave the wolves behind ;-)
>

[DancesWithCars]

more inline

and reviewing, highlighting/ commenting on the original
posting/ thread below that...


On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:22 AM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
<mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt; wrote:
>  --- On Thu, 9/24/09, DancesWithCars <danceswithcars(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>
> > From: DancesWithCars <danceswithcars(a)gmail.com&gt;
> > Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar Labs
> > To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis" <mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt;
> > Cc: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com, "David Farning"
> <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;, "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
> > Date: Thursday, September 24, 2009, 6:45 AM
> > I'm not sure about the hardware
> > issues
> > mentioned below, as new to some of these lists,
> > but if there is an installed base of XO-1 computers
> > with special hardware like the touchpad
> > with 2 extra areas that were never implemented,
> > why not develop applications for those,
> > even if the XO-1.5 and XO-2 plans don't
> > include them?
> >
> > What are you going to tell the kids
> > with XO-1s when the XO-1.5 come out?
> > What is the consolation prize?
> > Knowing more about it, and
> > being further up the learning curve?
> > 
Note: Nothing mentioned on new hardware
and have/ vs. have nots on that?...

> > Also, the battery issues will get worse,
> > as the hardware gets older, so testing
> > and determining when need new battery,
> > as a computer without power isn't much
> > fun.
> > 
Batteries, as my first laptop has problems
years later with the battery (flashing red),
and replacements not currently/ easily available,
and a 5 yo Nikon CoolPix 4300 camera that the
2 Gig Compact Flash memory card is not available
much anymore,  as it's too small size to be considered,
(Salesman: 4 Gig+ is better, must be able to use that,
Me: No, not really.
Salesman: Faster speed better?
Me: No, not supported, so why pay for that?
Salesman/Manager: Not comparable,
 so not a 1-to-1  swap replacement for cost/ raincheck)
 and stores want to force me
to get a new camera instead of the supplies
I went in for, i.e. snotty sales/ register people
making others wait in line [i.e. look how difficult
he is being making all the others in line wait,
when small local brand memory stuff is only
available at the counter...], and all...

But I rant on MicroCenter in the Washington DC
area...  But it is an industry thing even here
in supposedly 1st world where everyone
is supposedly rich and should be donors
only, not receipients (OLPC USA???)
(but by comparison to  $50 USD/ year
per capita annual income,
though consider cost of living here...)

> > Repairing hardware gets more crucial
> > as machines get older.
> > 
Try finding i386 PC-100 memory,
or getting delivery on an XO touchpad
without it being so late as to be useless,
 being shorted on the order
from XOExplosion.com and non responsive
to a certified letter and phone doesn't work,
and email rarely...

> > Being more inventive with what you have
> > instead of this is the shiny new machine,
> > so going deeper into the system,
> > maybe programming instead of just
> > using.  Or more time with the learning
> > content.
> >
> > Even as a ebook reader, getting new
> > content, creating new content,
> > maybe more translating content?
> >
> > I still think flossmanuals.net
> > needs indexing and other layout stuff,
> > under the hood, or however parallel,
> > LyX makes some assumptions,
> > and does some of that but not
> > the wiki and social stuff up top,
> > so [La]TeX classes and styles might be
> > a good contribution, finding
> > objavi and booki source code,
> > etc...
> >
>
>  These are all very valid points. However, is not clear to me if you imply that they
> should be prioritized over the updating of the os/sugar or not. 
Getting something on a list of features/ requirements
is probably the first step, then prioritizing, when we can
a;; see what the whole list looks like, available
resources (time, skill, man/woman/kid power, etc), ...


>  I hope not since some of these may even benefit from an updated OS
> (touchpad, battery, other hardware related patches) as opposed to an unsupported one
> (Fedora 9). 
Fedora seems to be on a 6 month development
cycle.  The OLPC/ SugarLabs split plus OLPC
SW dev team cutbacks seems to have effected
the published timeline(s) greatly...

So maybe determining the timeline would be a
 good first step.   Suggesting an F-Odd release
cycle?  Backporting anything critical, security
wise, and keeping repos online for the full
year+ XO/Sugar cycle, if not longer?

Usenet/ UUNet store and forward seems like an
interesting technology to push updates
into remote areas.

Can an XO/Sugar machine actually share files?
Activity / kernel/ rpm / repo saved on local machine /
SD/ USB and easily update the others when meshing/
if approved by local neighbor(s)
 vs w/o whole mesh entire reflash image??
i.e. incrementals instead of full refresh?

Sugar has a large installed base on XO/
Fedora, and seems like it's not a Special Interest
(i.e. subgroup) but the largest part so far,
and relegating it to junior status, is demeaning.

Development (most people here are probably
developers? no?) is important, but serving
the customer base instead of orphaning
them is also important...

>  On the other hand being a voluntary process is hard to tell to people
> "you do this instead of that". You can certainly try to convince them, and I
> think you do a good job on that :-)
>  
I can voice my opinion, but others are free to disagree...

Usually what we call a democracy, but I'm not sure
if you prefer a meritocracy (those who do the work
get to determine how others live)??

> > The requirements for testing a new build
> > is some extra XO-n hardware for testing,
> > and a high speed connection, if giving
> > new .isos builds out to the world,
> > or access to some place that would,
> > plus the time and knowledge to
> > make the changes, find bugs,
> > report them, etc.
>
>  Again I'm not sure what this means. That is trivial? That a "beta" quality
> OS should be delivered to the students/deployments and let them debug it? Other?
>  
Less impossible (topic was trivial), if supported.
I didn't say a beta quality, but you (original poster)
seem to want us to just be testers, so
if you have to have an RT account,
join a Gang (interpreted differently here when
6 surround me at MetroRail and want my stuff,
i.e bike/ computer, etc), get flooded
with list emails just to report a bug/ process issue
(i.e. put a form on the Sugar interface and have it
store and forward when connected?
bottom up instead of top down,
creating feedback all the way down from kids/ users)
then the users of the software get to report
stuff, and it reported multiply, then filter it out/
condense symptoms/ merge into better reports,
and prioritize by User counts?...

Filters can sort out if the poster is a minor,
redact certain stuff, etc.  i.e. 30 kids reported
a problem with Z.  Must be worth looking into.
Local school admins not figuring it out, maybe
they need some support on that?


> >
> > And if 'It's An Eduction Project"
> > are we teaching self reliance
> > and how to do builds, make your
> > own constructionist style or
> > whatever teaching paradigm fits
> > the locals?  Or forcing dependence
> > upon others?
>
>  Again trying to read between the lines... 
Not always good to do when I'm pissed
about ClassActs and writing in response
to that... ;-/

Or writing in the middle of the night
with little sleep, but this thread is getting
messy...


>  I'm sure that "locals" have their hands full trying to
> make the best of the available hardware/software, adapt it to their needs and build their
> own apps when needed. 
So you don't think 'locals' are capable human beings??

That's the attitude I've gotten from OLPC...
Not as much from a Red Hat visit.

With their//our own customs and traditions
that seem to work for things We/they already encounter,
until a little XO is introduced/ [or forced, in some cases,
as some teachers/ admins  might not want it...]

Some organizations can't modify a kernel locally?
Create operating systems/ applications?
Translate English based dominance
to local languages?

A Finland grad student started Linux,
not the US.  And not M$.  But FSF and GNU
and many others added to it...


Even in the USA, MIT arrogance is pissing me off.
We 'locals' can host a book sprint, and be treated
like shit, not heard, not worthy of a visit from NN,
WB, etc as Congress / funding is the Only priority,
but not good enough to write/ be published (in ClassActs),
 must less vote on things that effect us
(SLOB)?

>  I would also guess that if the current Fedora 9-based OS is a blocker
> to paramount needs they may try to update it themselves. 
See the talk on the wiki.laptop.org F11forXO1 about some
git commands and the 'we are not going to do it,
but it's easy' type of tone, and then see if you
can do it from what was provided...

>  However, providing a better option as the F11/Sugar0.84+ is, in no
> way is in contrast with the "educational project". 
>  For one is _not_ a "computer education" project. 
Isn't anything done on a computer,
a computer education project? ;-/

But most people don't look under
the hood of their cars (those that own cars...)

>  So "upgrade your OS", is by no means a priority. 
Install or develop?
Remix the kernel modules?

>  Is welcome, but in no way required. 
>  Expecting a 9-12 years old on the other hand to come up with the
> solutions is conceivable but nothing to depend on, either. 
You might be surprised what 9-12 yos can do,
but there are also high schools, colleges,
administrators, teachers and community members
and over the lifecycle of the project,
kids starting out on XO's
might want to graduate to hacking kernels,
and going upstream, so to speak,
with support instead of fighting
the attitude that they are not good enough
to do that...

>  Finally the fact that if you give someone a fishing pole will eat
> fish all his/her life, does not preclude that you can not give them a fishing boat to get
> bigger fish, nor it implies they should built one. 
Giving someone *the first* fishing pole (G1G1 Donor)
does not mean that that once introduced to fishing,
they cannot try making a fishing pole locally once seen...

Or better yet, adapt the pole to the type of waters
locally.  Fishing off a dock / pier is one thing, in a stream,
another, and in the ocean, requires something else
entirely...

Not to mentioned bait...
[humorous analogy to herding cats somewhere in here]

>  They may as well build a boat by themselves but the goal here is to
> get as much and as good fish as possible given the needs. 
Since we are talking fishing, is that for sport or to
survive?

Here in the USA, many people are recreational
fisherman/women/kids.

And some poor/ homeless in the city,
that is the only way they get food/
fresh fish, but the rivers are polluted, though better
after the 1970's, but I'd guess here in Washington,DC
somewhat still polluted and mercury (+whatever) poisoned.

>  Finally self reliance is an important factor. 
Respect is important too.

>  However like everything else in teaching it must be build
gradually, in the right order and by experience. Assigning tasks that
will be never completed guaranties that you will build self
depreciation rather than self reliance.

>  And as you said "is an educational project".
>
>  If I read your comments wrong, my apologies.
>  
Well, you actually read them :-)
and stated what you heard,
so I'm responding, even if late,
and still pissed about ClassActs/
FlossManuals.net Index/ LyX/ LaTeX stuff.

Tux.org people were _involved_ in the
ClassActs, but not even listed on the
poster, t-shirt, invited to meet NN,
WB, etc...

And if Sugar is to be truely cross platform,
then it might want people who are involved
in other distros (Ubuntu, YellowDog, etc )/
hardware (Apple Mac, Sun?, etc)
plus the whole user community instead of
just developers (see criteria for SL membership)...

And most old hardware don't boot from USB
(64 bit laptop w battery issue mentioned above),
and really old stuff doesn't boot from CDR (Beige G3,
and P1 class machines, i.e. stuff people give away/
trash locally...), much less support virtualization
(even 1st Gen 64 bit Averatec and this 64 bit desktop
doesn't have the real cpu chip support)...


> >
> > My $.02 USD - costs of ownership/
> > && giving back.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
> > <mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt;
> > wrote:
> > > Now, that's an excellent idea!
> > > However, the crucial thing before any extensive
> > building/testing starts is to address some major issues that
> > would stop most people from using/testing F11/Sugar.84+.
> > Namely the 
Xorg geode video driver,
the camera
and the battery monitor.

> > These will primarily need developers.
> > > Having these components in place then a daily build
> > bug fixing/reporting system would be more valuable since
> > more people may be willing to give it a try, identifying the
> > "minor" issues that may eventually allow a
> > deployment-quality release.
> > > If this is going to be an OLPC, Fedora or SL project,
> > I think is irrelevant. XO-1 is an EOL machine that runs an
> > OS/UI developed by "some other" organization. Is literally
> > orphan (besides these limited efforts) so any "adopter"
> > should be welcome. Whoever sets it up should be good to go.
> > With almost a million users is the biggest educational
> > linux/sugar implementation and worths every attention.
> > >
> > > --- On Mon, 9/21/09, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> From: David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
> > >> Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar
> > Labs
> > >> To: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
> > >> Cc: "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
> > >> Date: Monday, September 21, 2009, 7:36 PM
> > >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM,
> > >> Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com&gt;
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > Hi David,
> > >> >
> > >> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:48 PM, David
> > Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >> For the past several months the
> > OLPC/Sugar Labs
> > >> ecosystem has been
> > >> >> getting requests to provide releases of
> > more
> > >> recent versions of Sugar
> > >> >> on the XO.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The leading effort in this direction
> > seems to be
> > >> the F11-XO1 project.
> > >> >> I would like to like to invite F11-XO1 to
> > become
> > >> part of the XO SIG.
> > >> >> I have been trying to articulate the
> > project goals
> > >> and gather momentum
> > >> >> across several groups.
> > >> >> 1.  OLPC as a downstream. 
as posted by SL

> > >> >> 2. Sugar Labs as a focus point. 
as posted by SL

> > >> >> 3. Various ecosystem leaders to do pilots
> > with
> > >> current versions of Sugar on XOs. 
near as I can tell OLPC doesn't do Pilots,
they expect results only, at least in the
contributor program.

> > >> >> 4. Various testers to provide user level
> > testing. 
User level testing on the kernel???
Or Sugar?
Or Activities?
Or the whole Gestalt?

> > >> >>
> > >> >> The goal of this groups is not to
> > _fragment_ the
> > >> existing efforts.
> > >> >> The goal is bring the various efforts
> > together to
> > >> form a critical mass
> > >> >> to help pull this propel forward.
> > >> >
> > >> > As far as I'm aware there is no F11-XO1
> > project, I'm
> > >> aware of a couple
> > >> > of different projects to get the latest Sugar
> > releases
> > >> on the XO.
> > >> > - The SoaS on XO which is being run my Martin
> > Dengler
> > >> in conjunction
> > >> > with SoaS and SL (that's where its all
> > hosted).
> > >> > - The OLPC project to get Fedora 11 on both
> > the XO-1.5
> > >> and XO-1 which
> > >> > is being handled by Steven M. Parrish (and
> > Daniel
> > >> Drake / Chris Ball)
> > >>
> > >> This confusion is part of what I am hoping to
> > clear up by
> > >> create a
> > >> single clearly defined project.
> > >>
> > >> I have heard back from many of the people working
> > on the
> > >> various
> > >> projects. the work flow seems to be:
> > >> 1. Sugar development team creates platform.
> > >> 2. Fedora packagers package Sugar... and
> > everything else
> > >> required to
> > >> make a disto.
> > >> 3a. SoaS takes packages and turns them into a Soas
> > image.
> > >> 3b. Soas is getting pretty well test via test days
> > and
> > >> deployments
> > >> such as the GPA.
> > >> 4a. Steven take the Fedora packages adds the XO
> > specific
> > >> bit and turns
> > >> them into xo builds.
> > >> 4b. limited testing for xo builds.
> > >>
> > >> Because of time restrictions, the F11 on XO effort
> > seems to
> > >> be
> > >> reactive.  They take the output from cjb and the
> > >> fedora packages and
> > >> create builds.  I believe that the XO SIG could
> > help
> > >> generate interest
> > >> and attract more developers and testers to the
> > project.
> > >>
> > >> > Both projects are cross pollinated and use
> > components
> > >> of work done by
> > >> > both as well as myself and other Fedora
> > upstream
> > >> people. I don't
> > >> > believe there's much difference between them
> > as where
> > >> possible I
> > >> > believe most stuff is pushed upsteam. There
> > is no
> > >> current Fedora based
> > >> > project working on this directly due to the
> > down
> > >> stream projects.
> > >> >
> > >> > I have my own build that I use but that
> > isn't
> > >> generally published and
> > >> > is mostly to test core fedora for dependency
> > bloat and
> > >> breakages.
> > >>
> > >> Would it be useful if we started by combining your
> > work and
> > >> Stevens
> > >> into an automatic build system.  This could help
> > >> identify breakages.
> > >> Then we could create a release cycle of alpha and
> > beta and
> > >> final
> > >> releases.
> > >>
> > >> By creating the daily builds and widely
> > broadcasting the
> > >> various
> > >> releases, we can engage a larger community of
> > testers.
> > >>
> > >> david
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >> Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
> > >> Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
> > >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
> > > Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
> > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > DancesWithCars
> > leave the wolves behind ;-)
> >
>
>
>
>  


-- 
DancesWithCars
leave the wolves behind ;-)

[Yioryos Asprobounitis]

This is getting _very_ complicated/confusing with references to unclear to me issues. 
would be better if in a different post you code your reasons for _not_ forming a SIG. eg
what is the harm per se, not as oppose to something else. Then in another post what, OLPC,
SL, others should be doing about the XO-1/Sugar installed base.
I thing that these will get your messages much better across.   
So for now I'll just "answer" some misunderstanding-derived questions.
No, I do not prefer meritocracy. (how did you come up with this?)
No, I think that "locals" are very capable but have other priorities.(I even
said so originally)

Best


--- On Sat, 9/26/09, DancesWithCars <danceswithcars(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  From: DancesWithCars <danceswithcars(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar Labs
>  To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis" <mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt;
>  Cc: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com, "David Farning"
> <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;, "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  Date: Saturday, September 26, 2009, 3:53 AM
>  more inline
>  
>  and reviewing, highlighting/ commenting on the original
>  posting/ thread below that...
>  
>  
>  On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:22 AM, Yioryos Asprobounitis
>  <mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > --- On Thu, 9/24/09, DancesWithCars <danceswithcars(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  >
>  >> From: DancesWithCars <danceswithcars(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  >> Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at Sugar
>  Labs
>  >> To: "Yioryos Asprobounitis" <mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt;
>  >> Cc: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com,
>  "David Farning" <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;,
>  "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  >> Date: Thursday, September 24, 2009, 6:45 AM
>  >> I'm not sure about the hardware
>  >> issues
>  >> mentioned below, as new to some of these lists,
>  >> but if there is an installed base of XO-1
>  computers
>  >> with special hardware like the touchpad
>  >> with 2 extra areas that were never implemented,
>  >> why not develop applications for those,
>  >> even if the XO-1.5 and XO-2 plans don't
>  >> include them?
>  >>
>  >> What are you going to tell the kids
>  >> with XO-1s when the XO-1.5 come out?
>  >> What is the consolation prize?
>  >> Knowing more about it, and
>  >> being further up the learning curve?
>  >>
>  
>  Note: Nothing mentioned on new hardware
>  and have/ vs. have nots on that?...
>  
>  >> Also, the battery issues will get worse,
>  >> as the hardware gets older, so testing
>  >> and determining when need new battery,
>  >> as a computer without power isn't much
>  >> fun.
>  >>
>  
>  Batteries, as my first laptop has problems
>  years later with the battery (flashing red),
>  and replacements not currently/ easily available,
>  and a 5 yo Nikon CoolPix 4300 camera that the
>  2 Gig Compact Flash memory card is not available
>  much anymore,  as it's too small size to be
>  considered,
>  (Salesman: 4 Gig+ is better, must be able to use that,
>  Me: No, not really.
>  Salesman: Faster speed better?
>  Me: No, not supported, so why pay for that?
>  Salesman/Manager: Not comparable,
>   so not a 1-to-1  swap replacement for cost/
>  raincheck)
>   and stores want to force me
>  to get a new camera instead of the supplies
>  I went in for, i.e. snotty sales/ register people
>  making others wait in line [i.e. look how difficult
>  he is being making all the others in line wait,
>  when small local brand memory stuff is only
>  available at the counter...], and all...
>  
>  But I rant on MicroCenter in the Washington DC
>  area...  But it is an industry thing even here
>  in supposedly 1st world where everyone
>  is supposedly rich and should be donors
>  only, not receipients (OLPC USA???)
>  (but by comparison to  $50 USD/ year
>  per capita annual income,
>  though consider cost of living here...)
>  
>  >> Repairing hardware gets more crucial
>  >> as machines get older.
>  >>
>  
>  Try finding i386 PC-100 memory,
>  or getting delivery on an XO touchpad
>  without it being so late as to be useless,
>   being shorted on the order
>  from XOExplosion.com and non responsive
>  to a certified letter and phone doesn't work,
>  and email rarely...
>  
>  >> Being more inventive with what you have
>  >> instead of this is the shiny new machine,
>  >> so going deeper into the system,
>  >> maybe programming instead of just
>  >> using.  Or more time with the learning
>  >> content.
>  >>
>  >> Even as a ebook reader, getting new
>  >> content, creating new content,
>  >> maybe more translating content?
>  >>
>  >> I still think flossmanuals.net
>  >> needs indexing and other layout stuff,
>  >> under the hood, or however parallel,
>  >> LyX makes some assumptions,
>  >> and does some of that but not
>  >> the wiki and social stuff up top,
>  >> so [La]TeX classes and styles might be
>  >> a good contribution, finding
>  >> objavi and booki source code,
>  >> etc...
>  >>
>  >
>  > These are all very valid points. However, is not clear
>  to me if you imply that they should be prioritized over the
>  updating of the os/sugar or not.
>  
>  Getting something on a list of features/ requirements
>  is probably the first step, then prioritizing, when we can
>  a;; see what the whole list looks like, available
>  resources (time, skill, man/woman/kid power, etc), ...
>  
>  
>  > I hope not since some of these may even benefit from
>  an updated OS (touchpad, battery, other hardware related
>  patches) as opposed to an unsupported one (Fedora 9).
>  
>  Fedora seems to be on a 6 month development
>  cycle.  The OLPC/ SugarLabs split plus OLPC
>  SW dev team cutbacks seems to have effected
>  the published timeline(s) greatly...
>  
>  So maybe determining the timeline would be a
>   good first step.   Suggesting an F-Odd
>  release
>  cycle?  Backporting anything critical, security
>  wise, and keeping repos online for the full
>  year+ XO/Sugar cycle, if not longer?
>  
>  Usenet/ UUNet store and forward seems like an
>  interesting technology to push updates
>  into remote areas.
>  
>  Can an XO/Sugar machine actually share files?
>  Activity / kernel/ rpm / repo saved on local machine /
>  SD/ USB and easily update the others when meshing/
>  if approved by local neighbor(s)
>   vs w/o whole mesh entire reflash image??
>  i.e. incrementals instead of full refresh?
>  
>  Sugar has a large installed base on XO/
>  Fedora, and seems like it's not a Special Interest
>  (i.e. subgroup) but the largest part so far,
>  and relegating it to junior status, is demeaning.
>  
>  Development (most people here are probably
>  developers? no?) is important, but serving
>  the customer base instead of orphaning
>  them is also important...
>  
>  > On the other hand being a voluntary process is hard to
>  tell to people "you do this instead of that". You can
>  certainly try to convince them, and I think you do a good
>  job on that :-)
>  >
>  I can voice my opinion, but others are free to disagree...
>  
>  Usually what we call a democracy, but I'm not sure
>  if you prefer a meritocracy (those who do the work
>  get to determine how others live)??
>  
>  >> The requirements for testing a new build
>  >> is some extra XO-n hardware for testing,
>  >> and a high speed connection, if giving
>  >> new .isos builds out to the world,
>  >> or access to some place that would,
>  >> plus the time and knowledge to
>  >> make the changes, find bugs,
>  >> report them, etc.
>  >
>  > Again I'm not sure what this means. That is trivial?
>  That a "beta" quality OS should be delivered to the
>  students/deployments and let them debug it? Other?
>  >
>  Less impossible (topic was trivial), if supported.
>  I didn't say a beta quality, but you (original poster)
>  seem to want us to just be testers, so
>  if you have to have an RT account,
>  join a Gang (interpreted differently here when
>  6 surround me at MetroRail and want my stuff,
>  i.e bike/ computer, etc), get flooded
>  with list emails just to report a bug/ process issue
>  (i.e. put a form on the Sugar interface and have it
>  store and forward when connected?
>  bottom up instead of top down,
>  creating feedback all the way down from kids/ users)
>  then the users of the software get to report
>  stuff, and it reported multiply, then filter it out/
>  condense symptoms/ merge into better reports,
>  and prioritize by User counts?...
>  
>  Filters can sort out if the poster is a minor,
>  redact certain stuff, etc.  i.e. 30 kids reported
>  a problem with Z.  Must be worth looking into.
>  Local school admins not figuring it out, maybe
>  they need some support on that?
>  
>  
>  >>
>  >> And if 'It's An Eduction Project"
>  >> are we teaching self reliance
>  >> and how to do builds, make your
>  >> own constructionist style or
>  >> whatever teaching paradigm fits
>  >> the locals?  Or forcing dependence
>  >> upon others?
>  >
>  > Again trying to read between the lines...
>  
>  Not always good to do when I'm pissed
>  about ClassActs and writing in response
>  to that... ;-/
>  
>  Or writing in the middle of the night
>  with little sleep, but this thread is getting
>  messy...
>  
>  
>  > I'm sure that "locals" have their hands full trying to
>  make the best of the available hardware/software, adapt it
>  to their needs and build their own apps when needed.
>  
>  So you don't think 'locals' are capable human beings??
>  
>  That's the attitude I've gotten from OLPC...
>  Not as much from a Red Hat visit.
>  
>  With their//our own customs and traditions
>  that seem to work for things We/they already encounter,
>  until a little XO is introduced/ [or forced, in some
>  cases,
>  as some teachers/ admins  might not want it...]
>  
>  Some organizations can't modify a kernel locally?
>  Create operating systems/ applications?
>  Translate English based dominance
>  to local languages?
>  
>  A Finland grad student started Linux,
>  not the US.  And not M$.  But FSF and GNU
>  and many others added to it...
>  
>  
>  Even in the USA, MIT arrogance is pissing me off.
>  We 'locals' can host a book sprint, and be treated
>  like shit, not heard, not worthy of a visit from NN,
>  WB, etc as Congress / funding is the Only priority,
>  but not good enough to write/ be published (in ClassActs),
>   must less vote on things that effect us
>  (SLOB)?
>  
>  > I would also guess that if the current Fedora 9-based
>  OS is a blocker to paramount needs they may try to update it
>  themselves.
>  
>  See the talk on the wiki.laptop.org F11forXO1 about some
>  git commands and the 'we are not going to do it,
>  but it's easy' type of tone, and then see if you
>  can do it from what was provided...
>  
>  > However, providing a better option as the
>  F11/Sugar0.84+ is, in no way is in contrast with the
>  "educational project".
>  
>  > For one is _not_ a "computer education" project.
>  
>  Isn't anything done on a computer,
>  a computer education project? ;-/
>  
>  But most people don't look under
>  the hood of their cars (those that own cars...)
>  
>  > So "upgrade your OS", is by no means a priority.
>  
>  Install or develop?
>  Remix the kernel modules?
>  
>  > Is welcome, but in no way required.
>  
>  > Expecting a 9-12 years old on the other hand to come
>  up with the solutions is conceivable but nothing to depend
>  on, either.
>  
>  You might be surprised what 9-12 yos can do,
>  but there are also high schools, colleges,
>  administrators, teachers and community members
>  and over the lifecycle of the project,
>  kids starting out on XO's
>  might want to graduate to hacking kernels,
>  and going upstream, so to speak,
>  with support instead of fighting
>  the attitude that they are not good enough
>  to do that...
>  
>  > Finally the fact that if you give someone a fishing
>  pole will eat fish all his/her life, does not preclude that
>  you can not give them a fishing boat to get bigger fish, nor
>  it implies they should built one.
>  
>  Giving someone *the first* fishing pole (G1G1 Donor)
>  does not mean that that once introduced to fishing,
>  they cannot try making a fishing pole locally once seen...
>  
>  Or better yet, adapt the pole to the type of waters
>  locally.  Fishing off a dock / pier is one thing, in a
>  stream,
>  another, and in the ocean, requires something else
>  entirely...
>  
>  Not to mentioned bait...
>  [humorous analogy to herding cats somewhere in here]
>  
>  > They may as well build a boat by themselves but the
>  goal here is to get as much and as good fish as possible
>  given the needs.
>  
>  Since we are talking fishing, is that for sport or to
>  survive?
>  
>  Here in the USA, many people are recreational
>  fisherman/women/kids.
>  
>  And some poor/ homeless in the city,
>  that is the only way they get food/
>  fresh fish, but the rivers are polluted, though better
>  after the 1970's, but I'd guess here in Washington,DC
>  somewhat still polluted and mercury (+whatever) poisoned.
>  
>  > Finally self reliance is an important factor.
>  
>  Respect is important too.
>  
>  > However like everything else in teaching it must be
>  build
>  gradually, in the right order and by experience. Assigning
>  tasks that
>  will be never completed guaranties that you will build
>  self
>  depreciation rather than self reliance.
>  
>  > And as you said "is an educational project".
>  >
>  > If I read your comments wrong, my apologies.
>  >
>  Well, you actually read them :-)
>  and stated what you heard,
>  so I'm responding, even if late,
>  and still pissed about ClassActs/
>  FlossManuals.net Index/ LyX/ LaTeX stuff.
>  
>  Tux.org people were _involved_ in the
>  ClassActs, but not even listed on the
>  poster, t-shirt, invited to meet NN,
>  WB, etc...
>  
>  And if Sugar is to be truely cross platform,
>  then it might want people who are involved
>  in other distros (Ubuntu, YellowDog, etc )/
>  hardware (Apple Mac, Sun?, etc)
>  plus the whole user community instead of
>  just developers (see criteria for SL membership)...
>  
>  And most old hardware don't boot from USB
>  (64 bit laptop w battery issue mentioned above),
>  and really old stuff doesn't boot from CDR (Beige G3,
>  and P1 class machines, i.e. stuff people give away/
>  trash locally...), much less support virtualization
>  (even 1st Gen 64 bit Averatec and this 64 bit desktop
>  doesn't have the real cpu chip support)...
>  
>  
>  >>
>  >> My $.02 USD - costs of ownership/
>  >> && giving back.
>  >>
>  >> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Yioryos
>  Asprobounitis
>  >> <mavrothal(a)yahoo.com&gt;
>  >> wrote:
>  >> > Now, that's an excellent idea!
>  >> > However, the crucial thing before any
>  extensive
>  >> building/testing starts is to address some major
>  issues that
>  >> would stop most people from using/testing
>  F11/Sugar.84+.
>  >> Namely the
>  Xorg geode video driver,
>  the camera
>  and the battery monitor.
>  
>  >> These will primarily need developers.
>  >> > Having these components in place then a daily
>  build
>  >> bug fixing/reporting system would be more valuable
>  since
>  >> more people may be willing to give it a try,
>  identifying the
>  >> "minor" issues that may eventually allow a
>  >> deployment-quality release.
>  >> > If this is going to be an OLPC, Fedora or SL
>  project,
>  >> I think is irrelevant. XO-1 is an EOL machine that
>  runs an
>  >> OS/UI developed by "some other" organization. Is
>  literally
>  >> orphan (besides these limited efforts) so any
>  "adopter"
>  >> should be welcome. Whoever sets it up should be
>  good to go.
>  >> With almost a million users is the biggest
>  educational
>  >> linux/sugar implementation and worths every
>  attention.
>  >> >
>  >> > --- On Mon, 9/21/09, David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  >> wrote:
>  >> >
>  >> >> From: David Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  >> >> Subject: Re: XO Special interest group at
>  Sugar
>  >> Labs
>  >> >> To: fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  >> >> Cc: "iaep" <iaep(a)lists.sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  >> >> Date: Monday, September 21, 2009, 7:36
>  PM
>  >> >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM,
>  >> >> Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  >> >> wrote:
>  >> >> > Hi David,
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 7:48 PM,
>  David
>  >> Farning <dfarning(a)sugarlabs.org&gt;
>  >> >> wrote:
>  >> >> >> For the past several months the
>  >> OLPC/Sugar Labs
>  >> >> ecosystem has been
>  >> >> >> getting requests to provide
>  releases of
>  >> more
>  >> >> recent versions of Sugar
>  >> >> >> on the XO.
>  >> >> >>
>  >> >> >> The leading effort in this
>  direction
>  >> seems to be
>  >> >> the F11-XO1 project.
>  >> >> >> I would like to like to invite
>  F11-XO1 to
>  >> become
>  >> >> part of the XO SIG.
>  >> >> >> I have been trying to articulate
>  the
>  >> project goals
>  >> >> and gather momentum
>  >> >> >> across several groups.
>  >> >> >> 1.  OLPC as a downstream.
>  
>  as posted by SL
>  
>  >> >> >> 2. Sugar Labs as a focus point.
>  
>  as posted by SL
>  
>  >> >> >> 3. Various ecosystem leaders to
>  do pilots
>  >> with
>  >> >> current versions of Sugar on XOs.
>  
>  near as I can tell OLPC doesn't do Pilots,
>  they expect results only, at least in the
>  contributor program.
>  
>  >> >> >> 4. Various testers to provide
>  user level
>  >> testing.
>  
>  User level testing on the kernel???
>  Or Sugar?
>  Or Activities?
>  Or the whole Gestalt?
>  
>  >> >> >>
>  >> >> >> The goal of this groups is not
>  to
>  >> _fragment_ the
>  >> >> existing efforts.
>  >> >> >> The goal is bring the various
>  efforts
>  >> together to
>  >> >> form a critical mass
>  >> >> >> to help pull this propel
>  forward.
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > As far as I'm aware there is no
>  F11-XO1
>  >> project, I'm
>  >> >> aware of a couple
>  >> >> > of different projects to get the
>  latest Sugar
>  >> releases
>  >> >> on the XO.
>  >> >> > - The SoaS on XO which is being run
>  my Martin
>  >> Dengler
>  >> >> in conjunction
>  >> >> > with SoaS and SL (that's where its
>  all
>  >> hosted).
>  >> >> > - The OLPC project to get Fedora 11
>  on both
>  >> the XO-1.5
>  >> >> and XO-1 which
>  >> >> > is being handled by Steven M.
>  Parrish (and
>  >> Daniel
>  >> >> Drake / Chris Ball)
>  >> >>
>  >> >> This confusion is part of what I am
>  hoping to
>  >> clear up by
>  >> >> create a
>  >> >> single clearly defined project.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> I have heard back from many of the people
>  working
>  >> on the
>  >> >> various
>  >> >> projects. the work flow seems to be:
>  >> >> 1. Sugar development team creates
>  platform.
>  >> >> 2. Fedora packagers package Sugar... and
>  >> everything else
>  >> >> required to
>  >> >> make a disto.
>  >> >> 3a. SoaS takes packages and turns them
>  into a Soas
>  >> image.
>  >> >> 3b. Soas is getting pretty well test via
>  test days
>  >> and
>  >> >> deployments
>  >> >> such as the GPA.
>  >> >> 4a. Steven take the Fedora packages adds
>  the XO
>  >> specific
>  >> >> bit and turns
>  >> >> them into xo builds.
>  >> >> 4b. limited testing for xo builds.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> Because of time restrictions, the F11 on
>  XO effort
>  >> seems to
>  >> >> be
>  >> >> reactive.  They take the output from cjb
>  and the
>  >> >> fedora packages and
>  >> >> create builds.  I believe that the XO
>  SIG could
>  >> help
>  >> >> generate interest
>  >> >> and attract more developers and testers
>  to the
>  >> project.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> > Both projects are cross pollinated
>  and use
>  >> components
>  >> >> of work done by
>  >> >> > both as well as myself and other
>  Fedora
>  >> upstream
>  >> >> people. I don't
>  >> >> > believe there's much difference
>  between them
>  >> as where
>  >> >> possible I
>  >> >> > believe most stuff is pushed
>  upsteam. There
>  >> is no
>  >> >> current Fedora based
>  >> >> > project working on this directly due
>  to the
>  >> down
>  >> >> stream projects.
>  >> >> >
>  >> >> > I have my own build that I use but
>  that
>  >> isn't
>  >> >> generally published and
>  >> >> > is mostly to test core fedora for
>  dependency
>  >> bloat and
>  >> >> breakages.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> Would it be useful if we started by
>  combining your
>  >> work and
>  >> >> Stevens
>  >> >> into an automatic build system.  This
>  could help
>  >> >> identify breakages.
>  >> >> Then we could create a release cycle of
>  alpha and
>  >> beta and
>  >> >> final
>  >> >> releases.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> By creating the daily builds and widely
>  >> broadcasting the
>  >> >> various
>  >> >> releases, we can engage a larger
>  community of
>  >> testers.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> david
>  >> >>
>  >> >>
>  _______________________________________________
>  >> >> Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
>  >> >> Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  >> >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>  >> >>
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  >> >
>  _______________________________________________
>  >> > Fedora-olpc-list mailing list
>  >> > Fedora-olpc-list(a)redhat.com
>  >> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-olpc-list
>  >> >
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> --
>  >> DancesWithCars
>  >> leave the wolves behind ;-)
>  >>
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  
>  
>  
>  -- 
>  DancesWithCars
>  leave the wolves behind ;-)
>