Yes with dependencies I also meant the version of them (for API incompatible versions at least).
I'm all for getting concrete :) On Thursday, 7 November 2013, David Farning wrote: > On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Daniel Narvaez > <dwnarv...@gmail.com<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > Re library versions, that reminds of a point I should have put in my > list... > > > > I think now that the gobject introspection migration is over upstream can > > become more conservative about library versions. That should help both > > distributors and developers. We are already going in that direction > really. > > If we add Webkit1 compatibility as discussed, I think 0.102 might have > > pretty much the same dependencies of 0.98. The only exception is libxkb > if I > > remember correctly, for which introspection was really broken. > > In addition to dependencies there can be issues with versions of > dependencies. > > Within the next couple of week we should see these fixes flow > upstream. So we can start talking about concrete issues and examples > rather than abstract notions. I think that will help clarify the > discussion. > > AC's challenge was to quietly get a proof of concept in place which > adds value to deployments before suggesting making changes to > upstream. Now, AC has to clean up and abstract the proof of concept > work to prepare it for acceptance upstream. > > > On Thursday, 7 November 2013, David Farning wrote: > >> > >> I agree :) > >> > >> Right now, we are sitting back and seeing what roll OLPC-Australia is > >> going to play in the ecosystem. The One Education distribution out of > >> Australia is a combination of Dextrose, Sugar .100 and some custom > >> patches. My semi-informed guess is that Walter and Rangan ( > >> https://www.laptop.org.au/about ) are going to position One Education > >> as the successor to OLPC-OS. I hope that we will learn more at about > >> their plans at basecamp. ( http://olpcbasecamp.blogspot.com/ ) This > >> would take care or the leading edge on Fedora. > >> > >> On the Ubuntu side we have a bit of a challenge balancing bleeding > >> edge and stability. Sugar and Fedora tend to run a bit ahead of Debian > >> and Ubuntu in library versions. It take a significant amount of effort > >> to backport the necessary libraries to Ubuntu LTS. For this release we > >> agreed that the proper balance of innovation and stability was Sugar > >> .98 on Ubuntu 12.04. The next decision point will be which version of > >> Sugar to use for the 14.04 release due in the second quarter of 2014. > >> > >> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 8:05 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarv...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > Cool stuff. > >> > > >> > As for Fedora it would be great to have builds with the latest sugar > >> > (stable > >> > and unstable) releases. I'm not saying to ship those to deployments of > >> > course, but they would help upstream development, marketing and > >> > testing... > >> > And they would help AC to make the transition to the next sugar > release > >> > smoother. > >> > > >> > On 7 November 2013 02:05, David Farning <dfarn...@activitycentral.com > > > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Please see the link at the bottom left of > http://dextrose.ac/platform/ > >> >> for the Sugar on Ubuntu images which Activity Central and Plan Ceibal > >> >> are jointly developing. > >> >> > >> >> For stability it is based on Ubuntu 12.04 and Sugar .98. The testing > >> >> is done on classmate to meet Plan Ceibal's specifications. I should > >> >> work equally well on any machine that boots Ubuntu. > >> >> > >> >> It is currently is small scale testing by a couple hundred teachers. > >> >> When the image meets Ceibal's quality standards the pilot will scale > >> >> to approximately 10,000 units for wider testing. > >> >> > >> >> For more information, I have CC Anish Mangal, the project owner > (agile > >> >> speak) and Ruben Rodriguez the lead developer. Ruben has the > strongest > >> >> back ground on the technical issues involved in the port. Anish has > >> >> the deepest understanding of timelines and objectives. > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarv...@gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > On 6 November 2013 16:20, Manuel QuiƱones <ma...@laptop.org> > wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Classmates are basically just x86 netbooks, I've not tried it > as I > >> >> >> > don't have HW but I don't see any reason they shouldn't work > OOTB. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Yep. Sugar is running in classmates out of the box. In Uruguay > for > >> >> >> example. > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > You mean people are using them in Uruguay deployments? Which > distro? > >> >> > > >> >> > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > Sugar-devel mailing list > >> >> > sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org > >> >> > <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel> -- Daniel Narvaez
_______________________________________________ Marketing mailing list Marketing@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing