Re: [IAEP] Gnome vs Sugar -- The judgement day
El Sat, 26-06-2010 a las 00:01 -0400, Michael Stone escribió: > > Teachers demand a technological mean to solve a problem of discipline and > > computer literacy. > > Launch GNOME under a separate account with a quota and with limited or no sudo > access. This will cut out most of the mayhem, thereby buying you time to work > out a more integrated solution. This is a very good idea, and probably the way to go. We just lack the time to do it in this development cycle, because the time for developing new features is up and now we must concentrate on testing and fixing as many bugs as possible. For the next release, we could merge this along with a "boot recovery menu" feature that also didn't make it this time. -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/ ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Gnome vs Sugar -- The judgement day
El Sat, 26-06-2010 a las 13:42 +0100, Peter Robinson escribió: > > And presumably, one thing that could be done from Terminal is to > > install the control-panel section. > > yum install olpc-switch-desktop > > would do that for you. Yup! :) BTW, we've found a workable solution to the problem of yum being unusably slow and memory hungry on the XO-1: if we disable by default the fedora repositories, yum runs really quickly and does not download too much metadata. This command: yum --disablerepo fedora --disablerepo updates -y update Runs in 27 seconds the first time, 4 seconds the second time. If we add back all the rpms we ship to our custom repository, we could do small system upgrades with yum in a relatively affordable way. -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/ ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
[IAEP] FW: [support-gang] Voting Continues: Gnome vs Sugar -- The judgement day
I agree with Sameer and Marife. From an educator's point of view, having both Sugar and Gnome available has a lot of advantages. Sugar offers a kid-friendly environment, while at the same time offering some great Activities for older children. The younger ones probably won't find much of interest in Gnome to draw them away from Sugar, but for the older ones, having the option of switching back and forth without too much difficulty will encourage them to come back to Sugar for favorite Activities even when they have "graduated" to a grown-up's desktop like Gnome. This could also dampen the drive for getting "Windows" machines for older students. Who needs Windows when you can have Gnome? Caryl Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 10:56:22 -0400 From: marife.m...@gmail.com To: support-g...@lists.laptop.org Subject: Re: [support-gang] Voting Continues: Gnome vs Sugar -- The judgement day When I first play around with the XO 1.5 I was pleased with the switch desktop feature, I even shared it with my eKindling team and the same way they have a positive reaction with having sugar and gnome. I don't think that having this feature will take us away from our educational objective. It will solely depend on how this is implemented during the deployment. I see this feature as a great way to leverage the XO. For example the primary level kids will not care much about this switch as they have so many activities to explore in Sugar and they'll depend much on what is being presented to them, as well as the teachers who doesn't have much exposure with computers. As for the higher level class say grades 4-6 there's nothing wrong for them to explore GNOME as you are preparing them to have diversity in learning technology and it will be good for them to be expose with the most commonly used desktop environment. @marife On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 6:51 AM, George Hunt wrote: Wasn't there some mention of a build/hardware release for older children on the lists recently (I remember the color - blue/white plastic)? If he gnome desktop was only available as a download/reflash option, students who have gnome would already have demonstrated that they know a fix that doesn't require outside/adult support. In the same vein, teachers who wanted gnome, would have to obtain a usb, gain internet access, learn to reflash. George On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 1:40 AM, Abhishek Indoria wrote: Hey, Like some of the members, I feel that it's nothing wrong with having both Sugar and Gnome in builds. True, that we can try to remove the command from Control Panel, and it is true, Adam, they will figure it out. But, the catch is:they won't figure it out soon. They will take a long time for these. Only people with brilliant minds and hopefully those who are adults, can figure it out sooner (Can't define sooner, though). What I think, is that we can try to figure out a method, while having both the desktops in XO's, by which only people with authorized access (probably teachers) can reach to the Gnome desktop while children use Sugar. I think, (for developers) while testing new activities for XO (in many cases, software derived from Windows desktop and Linux), it would feel better having to test it first on Gnome desktop in XO for benchmarking, see how it performs, add some performance tweaks and release it to Sugar. Please correct me if I am wrong, as I do not know a great deal about the topic. Abhishek Chin music and high voltage T20 action on MSN Sports Sign up now. ___ support-gang mailing list support-g...@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/support-gang ___ support-gang mailing list support-g...@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/support-gang ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Gnome vs Sugar -- The judgement day
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 4:41 AM, Walter Bender wrote: > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Kevin Cole wrote: >> That's sort of where I was thinking: Make it "harder" or at least something >> requiring more than a button push. I know when I was having troubles with >> not being able to use the mouse, I was able to get to a virtual terminal, >> drill down to the appropriate file and edit it to switch desktop >> environments. I'm not saying it has to be THAT obscure, but something >> requiring a wee bit of effort may suffice... > > And presumably, one thing that could be done from Terminal is to > install the control-panel section. yum install olpc-switch-desktop would do that for you. Peter ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Gnome vs Sugar -- The judgement day
For whatever it's worth, I'm always in favor of allowing options, I'd make it harder but wouldn't kill it. Stephen Jacobs Associate Professor Interactive Games and Media Rochester Institute of Technology 102 Lomb Memorial Drive Bldg 70 Rochester, NY 14618 s...@mail.rit.edu 585-475-7803 ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOBs] Ooo4Kids logo request
I vote +1 to this use of the TM... but in the spirit of bike-shedding, I agree with with Bernie that the color-on-white schemes would be better on this page :) -walter On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > El Fri, 25-06-2010 a las 12:21 -0400, Mel Chua escribió: >> Continuing our "move discussion to list" adventures... >> >> Bernie brought up an OOo4Kids request to display our logo. Tomeu and I >> were unable to find the original text of the request - what is the >> project asking for? We're blocking until we get that text - does anyone >> know where to find it? >> >> A related motion, from Bernie: >> >> MOTION: To pre-approve the entire class of requests such as "can I put >> Sugar Labs logo in my partners/acknowledgments page?", as they are very >> frequent and hard to abuse for bad purposes. >> >> For the record: if we passed this, we'd need to agree on a specific >> change to our TM policy (http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Trademark). >> >> Discussion with Tomeu in #sugar-meeting just now led to the following >> conclusions (I'll speak for myself here, but I think Tomeu agrees): >> >> 1. We should automatically let other parties display *their* endorsement >> of Sugar - for instance, "I <3 and support Sugar Labs" >> banners/buttons/badges, because that is about the other party saying >> something about SL. >> >> 2. The other way around - something that implies that SL endorses >> something else, is exactly why we have the TM usage guidelines and >> request procedure, and Ooo4Kids should follow it - if their request >> falls in one of the already-automated categories, then sure, it's >> automated... if it isn't, then it will need to be voted on. >> >> It's not clear whether Ooo4Kids is asking for #1 or #2, so we're >> ultimately still blocking on finding the text of that request. Please >> help! (If you know who the original requestor of this motion is, please >> let them know to get in touch with us.) > > This is the original "request": > > hello > just FYI > http://www.educoo.org/pages/partenaires/ > Adam sent me some machines, and you are counted as partner > you means "Sugar Labs" > if ever you disagree, just tell us, and we'll remove the logo, > and everything you'll ask to > thanks for forwarding the info to Adam and other > I do agree > except our logo with a black bg looks horrible :-) > I'll ask the board to confirm they agree with this partnership, > but I'm sure they will say ok > ah, sorry. In fact, this is the first try, and we'll probably > improve. e.g. the UTBM logo is a fake, and I sent one correct to Fred > (ht eguy who will maintain the page) > ok, thanks a lot > I sent an email asking if this usage of our logo is ok without > requesting a TM license > > For the small things like this, I think anything much more sophisticated > than "can I put the SL logo in our partners page?" + "sure, go ahead!" > seems overkill to me. > > Besides the waste of time, I'm afraid that acting like a bunch of > paranoid attorneys when interacting with our partners and contributors > would hurt Sugar Labs' public image way more than the tiny chance of our > logo receiving an undeserved acknowledgment somewhere. > > -- > // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ > \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/ > > ___ > SLOBs mailing list > sl...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
Re: [IAEP] Gnome vs Sugar -- The judgement day
On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 12:01 AM, Michael Stone wrote: >> Teachers demand a technological mean to solve a problem of discipline and >> computer literacy. > > Launch GNOME under a separate account with a quota and with limited or no sudo > access. This will cut out most of the mayhem, thereby buying you time to work > out a more integrated solution. A Rainbow-lite approach. Lot's of interest in Rainbow here in La Rioja. regards. -walter > > Michael > ___ > Devel mailing list > de...@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
