Re: Tentative CSUN hackfest schedule?
On 2 February 2010 15:29, Eitan Isaacson wrote: > Sorry I have not been responding to e-mail, i am traveling a bit now. In > Cambridge UK. Welcome to the UK. Even if it is with Oxford's traditional enemy :-) The Project:Possibility students who win the SS12 event are now officially part of the conference. They will be hanging around on Friday and doing a poster presentation on Sat. So it's a great chance to recruit them to join GNOME a11y. Perhaps GNOME could do a presentation to them? They will be a mixture of CSUN UCS & UCLA CS students. > Does someone want to make this schedule readable on the wiki? Made a rough start and began an "interesting sessions" table too. Can others add as they see fit? Steve ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
Re: GNOME 2.30: go stable or go cutting edge?
Speaking from the standpoint of a user. I want it to be stable. I don't mind working with an unstable version on a virtual machine but I want my main machine to remain stable so I can work and I want to be able to upgrade my OS (ubuntu) without loosing my accessibility. Granted I do most of my work at the command console but I still need and use openoffice and firefox along with other software and really can't afford to have those unstable or inaccessible. Tom On Mon, 1 Feb 2010, Willie Walker wrote: Hi All: GNOME 2.30 is coming out on the Ides of March (March 15). I have one main question for you: do you want it to be stable or do you want it to have more cutting edge stuff? This question is predicated on the assumption that GNOME 2.30 is the last of the GNOME 2 releases and GNOME 3 is coming out this fall. It also assumes that we will resolve the harder problems we currently have with AT-SPI/D-Bus very soon. Here's the background -- GNOME Accessibility has been facing a "perfect storm" for the GNOME 2.30 cycle. The three major fronts of this storm are: Bonobo/CORBA elimination, WebKit accessibility, and GNOME Shell accessibility. You can read a lengthy summary of the current state of the work at http://live.gnome.org/Accessibility/GNOME3. Here's some pros/cons. Note that the quantity of pros/cons doesn't necessarily mean anything. They are just talking points, and actually quite simple at that. PROS/CONS for going with the cutting edge: == PRO: GNOME accessibility may be more widely available on smaller/mobile devices -- those devices are happy to have D-Bus but do not want CORBA. PRO: The cutting edge stuff will likely get more testing coverage for GNOME 3.0, helping improve the GNOME 3.0 accessibility experience. PRO: We will be able to eliminate a huge portion of deprecated stuff in GNOME. CON: GNOME 2.30 accessibility could very well be unstable or slow for day-to-day use for doing your job or functioning in life. Staying on GNOME 2.28.x would be recommended for people who need more stability. CON: GOK will not work. OnBoard and an early form of Caribou would be the on screen keyboard solutions. PROS/CONS for staying stable: = PRO: Users should still be able to use GNOME 2.30 with the same stability and reliability they get with GNOME 2.28.x. PRO: GOK will work. CON: The testing of cutting edge stuff may not be as broad, so GNOME 3.0 may go out without as much testing as it needs. CON: GNOME will need to continue to carry Bonobo/CORBA around. CON: GNOME accessibility will remain unavailable on smaller/mobile devices that do not ship Bonobo/CORBA. My first concern is the end user. As a result, I tend to be more conservative and lean towards stability. That is, making sure GNOME provides a compelling accessible desktop for reliable and usable day-to-day activity goes a long way to addressing the needs of the user. With this, we're likely to say GNOME 3.0 will be more wrinkled in terms of accessibility and we could look to GNOME 3.2 and 3.4 to iron things out. However, given where we are with proximity to GNOME 3, I'm also tempted by the notion of getting the new stuff out there sooner. This would potentially forsake the accessibility of the last (or one of the last) releases of the GNOME 2 series while helping set us up for an earlier accessibility success for GNOME 3. Please, speak up with your thoughts. The collective opinion of our group matters and it will help shape what recommendations we will make to the release team for GNOME 2.30. Will ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list On Mon, 1 Feb 2010, Luke Yelavich wrote: On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 11:54:19AM PST, Willie Walker wrote: Hi All: GNOME 2.30 is coming out on the Ides of March (March 15). I have one main question for you: do you want it to be stable or do you want it to have more cutting edge stuff? This question is predicated on the assumption that GNOME 2.30 is the last of the GNOME 2 releases and GNOME 3 is coming out this fall. It also assumes that we will resolve the harder problems we currently have with AT-SPI/D-Bus very soon. Ubuntu Lucid ships with GNOME 2.30, we are keeping CORBA around, since we still use evolution 2.28 for one. So from an LTS distro and a11y maintainer POV, I would prefer GNOME 2.30 remains accessibility enabled and aims for stability. The First one or two releases of Ubuntu after this LTS will likely have crack of the day content, which will be a good testing ground for GNOME3/accessibility bug squashing. Luke ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list On Tue, 2 F
Re: Tentative CSUN hackfest schedule?
Ok, this is good news, it's coming together! Sorry I have not been responding to e-mail, i am traveling a bit now. In Cambridge UK. We were originally concerned about the length of the conference, especially when it comes to accommodation costs for the foundation. So I made a decision earlier on to not sponsor more than 5 nights so that we could keep it reasonable. This dovetails well with the conference schedule, this is what I propose: We will kick off the hackfest at 9 AM on Tuesday morning the 23rd, and have it be a full day event. This will allow us to concentrate on our stuff without the booth being a chore we need to deflect resources towards. In the following days, we will be able to work in a less formal fashion along with the booth and conference, and have a proper hackfest wrap-up at the end of the 26th. The 27th is half a day on the exhibition floor, so we will be concluding the booth, folding it, etc. that morning and early afternoon. So in short, plan to be in the morning of the 23rd in San Diego, and leave sometime during the 27th, preferably in the afternoon so that you could help wrap things up, although I don't think it will be much of a chore. Does someone want to make this schedule readable on the wiki? Cheers, Eitan. On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Steve Lee wrote: > On 1 February 2010 19:29, Peter Korn wrote: > > While conference events start on March 21st with evening pre-conference > > registration, the exhibit floor is open Wednesday the 24th through > Saturday > > Thanks Peter - I'd missed the floor didn't open till later. > > > I suggest we either have hackfest activities during the period of 24-27, > or > > >sounds good > > > perhaps the day before (the 23rd) if we don't want to oppose activities > that > > may draw folks we otherwise want to have at the hackfest. > > And we might want to cheer each other on during presentations :-) > > Steve > ___ > gnome-accessibility-list mailing list > gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list > ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
Re: Tentative CSUN hackfest schedule?
On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 14:31 +, Steve Lee wrote: > On 1 February 2010 16:28, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: > > Thanks Eitan. > > > > Given that I'm looking at 9 to 14 hours travel time depending on > > layovers and the like, > > Wow that is almost as long as my journey from UK. LA was much easier. > I'm now planning to arrive to arrive on 22nd and leaving the last day > > Steve > Does this mean you'll have most of the hacking done while in-flight and by the time you get here, most of the work will be done and the rest of us can just sit back and party? Bryen ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
Re: Tentative CSUN hackfest schedule?
On 1 February 2010 19:29, Peter Korn wrote: > While conference events start on March 21st with evening pre-conference > registration, the exhibit floor is open Wednesday the 24th through Saturday Thanks Peter - I'd missed the floor didn't open till later. > I suggest we either have hackfest activities during the period of 24-27, or >sounds good > perhaps the day before (the 23rd) if we don't want to oppose activities that > may draw folks we otherwise want to have at the hackfest. And we might want to cheer each other on during presentations :-) Steve ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
Re: Tentative CSUN hackfest schedule?
On 1 February 2010 16:28, Joanmarie Diggs wrote: > Thanks Eitan. > > Given that I'm looking at 9 to 14 hours travel time depending on > layovers and the like, Wow that is almost as long as my journey from UK. LA was much easier. I'm now planning to arrive to arrive on 22nd and leaving the last day Steve ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
Re: GNOME 2.30: go stable or go cutting edge?
On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 03:12, Halim Sahin wrote: > Hi Will, > > I think both versions of at-spi should be included in gnome-2.30, > because at-spi2 need a lot of testing and not all users want to build > it from source. > openSUSE had at-spi2 in 11.2, however a really old version and wasn't very useful. I believe that we are looking at making it the default in 11.3. I know we have the latest tarball in milestone 1. We are also spend a far amount of time helping develop at-spi2 thanks to mike gorse. Cheers, Stephen ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
Introduction to open accessibility
I just thought I'd mention that OSS Watch have now published an introductory article on open accessibility. Needless to say GNOME get a mention ;-) http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/openaccessibility.xml -- Steve Lee ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
Re: GNOME 2.30: go stable or go cutting edge?
Halim Sahin wrote: > > I think both versions of at-spi should be included in gnome-2.30, > because at-spi2 need a lot of testing and not all users want to build > it from source. Or if this isn't feasible, we should at least encourage operating system distributions to create test packages. Debian, for instance, already has some, but they need to be updated. > > BTW.: Do we have a big improovement of a11y in gnome 2.30 compared to > gnome 2.28? > If not, we should make at-spi2 as default for gnome 2.30. > It's important to have many users to find all critical bugs before gnome > 3 arives. I can just imagine the complaints on the Orca list and elsewhere if that were done from those who wanted a stable system but upgraded, found themselves running AT-SPI2 inadvertently, and discovered that it didn't work reliably for them. > The (endusers) should be able to install and use corba based at-spi as > well if they don't want > to test and report at-spi2 bugs. If both can be included, I would keep the existing code as the default for Gnome 2.30, with a configuration option to switch to AT-SPI2. I would like to see packages for the new infrastructure as soon as practicable from distributors. ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
Re: GNOME 2.30: go stable or go cutting edge?
Hi Will, I think both versions of at-spi should be included in gnome-2.30, because at-spi2 need a lot of testing and not all users want to build it from source. BTW.: Do we have a big improovement of a11y in gnome 2.30 compared to gnome 2.28? If not, we should make at-spi2 as default for gnome 2.30. It's important to have many users to find all critical bugs before gnome 3 arives. The (endusers) should be able to install and use corba based at-spi as well if they don't want to test and report at-spi2 bugs. Just me two cents. Halim ___ gnome-accessibility-list mailing list gnome-accessibility-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-accessibility-list
