What's the reason that Etoys isn't part of the bundle anymore? Are there any technical problems? We do not expect the Sugar developers to fix them. I do like Tomeus suggestions below very much.
Rita Von meinem iPhone gesendet Am 22.03.2010 um 10:35 schrieb Tomeu Vizoso <to...@tomeuvizoso.net>: > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 18:10, Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Martin Langhoff >> <martin.langh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com >>> > wrote: >>>> On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Sean DALY <sdaly...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> The problem with this approach is that it renders SoaS >>>>> ineffective for >>>>> new tryers of Sugar (i.e. the overwhelming majority of teachers >>>>> and >>>>> parents we are trying to reach). >>>> >>>> I don't think it will be any less ineffective than having 20 >>>> activities of which half have issues, crash or just don't run. >>> >>> Are people saying _only 6 activities work reliably?_ >>> >>> My question of "which is it?" was assuming there are more than 6 >>> that >>> run well, demo well, maintained, etc. So it meant "which plan is >>> it, 6 >>> activities that allow downloading and installing of more, or the >>> good >>> ones?" >>> >>> If there are only 6 good ones... would focus on making that list >>> longer. >>> >>> Did APIs break with Sugar churn, Fedora churn? Developers upload >>> without testing? (Rethorical! Flamefest warning! Those questions are >>> bound to be a flamefest blaming people who don't deserve to be >>> blamed... :-( ) >> >> I think some of or all of the above are to blame. I'm still trying to >> get time to test. I should do so in the next couple of weeks. Record >> is one of the classic ones with issues. It was broken horribly for >> SOAS-2 and possibly even v1 but there's been no real attempt to fix >> it. Part of it is also that to be in Fedora the precompiled binary >> crud needs to be removed and in a lot of cases Activity developers >> don't test it with the native libraries. Also I know Write isn't >> currently on the list because it doesn't work properly [1] but >> obviously it would be a good one to have as its a great demo of the >> collaboration. >> >> We also want to get away from the point where a few people are >> running >> around doing 20 hour days trying to get the release out the door. >> >> I know just prior to to the last release that Sebastian was >> re-spinning the release into the early hours of the morning to fix >> Activity bugs to get the release out the door on time for marketing >> the day before an exam. If people aren't going to spend the time to >> make sure their activity works prior to a release there's only only >> limited time the main people have to do the testing along with all >> the >> other release process as well as getting on with the rest of their >> life. So I think its better we ship with less Activities better >> tested >> that cover the core functionality. > > FWIW, Peter's words resonate with my feelings on this issue, but maybe > this change could have been communicated differently (or maybe I'm > misunderstanding its ultimate cause). > > How I see this issue is that the Sugar community has come to expect > the SoaS maintainer(s) to test dozens of activities each release cycle > and fix all the issues that may have crept in. Of course, this is an > unreasonable expectation and the SoaS team has decided to reduce the > scope of their work so it becomes more doable. > > What the SoaS team could have said instead of "we'll ship half a dozen > activities", is "we have agreed on a criteria for activities that are > to be included in a SoaS release". Such a criteria could have been > something like: > > - the activity has been tested and works with the last Sugar release, > > - the community has voted this activity as sufficiently relevant to be > present in SoaS, > > - the activity has a maintainer that will react to issues with the > activity, answer questions, etc. > > - the activity has been packaged as a rpm and is part of Fedora. > > This may be more effective in tackling with the root cause, which I > feel to be unreasonable expectation for the actual resources. The > community would understand that the SoaS team currently doesn't have > enough resources to include so many activities, and also would feel > compelled to find more resources to maintain activities. > > Regards, > > Tomeu > >> Peter >> >> [1] http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/1767 >> _______________________________________________ >> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) >> i...@lists.sugarlabs.org >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep >> > _______________________________________________ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > i...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > _______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list Marketing@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing