+1
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarv...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > to be honest I haven't even evaluated alternative distributions because I > don't think we would have enough resources to do it anyway. We are making > minor changes to olpc-os-builder, rewriting it for another distribution > would be a lot of work. > > > On 12 May 2014 20:11, Jon Nettleton <jon.nettle...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarv...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > things are looking good so far, we already have all the models booting >> into >> > sugar 0.101 with wif apparentlyi working. I would like to take a step >> back >> > and understand a bit better where we want to go with this. Some random >> > thoughts and questions. >> > >> > * To really understand how much work is left I think we need some good >> > testing, especially on the hardware related bits. I expect there will be >> > lots of small things to fix, but it would be good to understand as >> early as >> > possible if there are roadblocks. I'm a bad tester and I've never used >> the >> > XO much, so I'm often not sure what is a regression and what is not... >> thus >> > helping with this would be particularly appreciated. >> > * Which deployments are planning to ship 0.102 soon and hence are >> interested >> > in this work? I know of AU. Maybe Uruguay? >> > * Do we need to support all the XO models? >> > * Should we contribute the olpc-os-builder changes back to OLPC or fork >> it? >> > I don't know if OLPC will do any active development on the linux side of >> > things, if not maybe better to turn this into a sugarlabs thing. >> > * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is >> > not. >> > * Do we care about maintaining the GNOME "dual boot"? I'm afraid we do, >> but >> > I want to make sure. >> > * As I mentioned in some other thread I'm interested in setting up >> automated >> > builds from sugar master. I have some vague plan of what it would look >> like >> > and wrote bits of it. The basic idea is that you would push changes to >> > github and get images automatically built. I think this is good for >> upstream >> > testing but the same infrastructure could be used by deployments. Are >> people >> > interested in using this? >> >> Why is all this work being put into Fedora 20? The maintenance window >> is limited and as of the next release they won't even support non-KMS >> drivers by default. Wouldn't make sense to look into a distribution >> that provides and LTS release? Resources already seem to be limited >> so having to chase after Fedora every 6 months to a year seems like a >> waste of resources. The GTK3 and GNOME teams obviously have their >> eyes on a different class of hardware than what is being used by >> deployments. >> >> -Jon >> > > > > -- > Daniel Narvaez > -- Gonzalo Odiard SugarLabs - Software for children learning
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel