Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
Indeed, deployments (both administrators and users) have much to contribute to Sugar and the XO's community. The challenge here was how to get and manage such tremendous amount of feedback? Back in November of 2011, we (the Peruvian Local Lab) made an open call to the community addressing this and other issues. We ended up designing and implementing the Sugar Network / Red Azúcar [1]. "El principal objetivo de la Red es proveer un ambiente que permita a los participantes crear, compartir y mejorar recursos educativos digitales libres y abiertos. Inicialmente, los recursos podrán ser Artículos, Archivos, Actividades de Sugar o Artefactos creados desde las actividades de Sugar." Today, thanks to the efforts of the Sugar Labs Platform Team and the generous contributions of some community members, we have Beta OS images for XO1 and XO1.5 that include access to the Sugar Network. Of course there is still much to do in order to take this support-social-content-exchange platform up to its potential, so please do not hesitate to give us a hand in any way you can. Best regards, [1] http://pe.sugarlabs.org/go/Red_Az%C3%BAcar 2013/10/31 Walter Bender : > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote: >> On 31 October 2013 19:31, Walter Bender wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma wrote: >>> >>> > Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder: >>> > >>> > Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's >>> > poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, >>> > low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for >>> > collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning. >>> > >>> >>> I think we all share concerns about the future of OLPCA (Indeed, I >>> left OLPC in 2008 to start Sugar Labs in part because of my concerns >>> about strategy and pedagogy.) That said, I continue to work in support >>> of OLPC's efforts since I believe that they are still a viable vehicle >>> to reach millions of children. But Sugar Labs is not OLPC. And Sugar >>> Labs has a future independent of OLPC. In 2008 we made a decision as a >>> community to be agnostic about hardware to the extent possible and >>> that is reflected in our code. In 2010, we made the decision to make >>> HTML5/Javascript a first-class development environment for Sugar with >>> the goals of both reaching more kids and attracting more developers. >>> This is work in progress, but we (Manuq and Daniel) have made great >>> strides. We face further challenges ahead. But our mission remains: >>> >>> to produce, distribute, and support the use of the Sugar learning >>> platform; it is a support base and gathering place for the community >>> of educators and developers to create, extend, teach, and learn with >>> the Sugar learning platform. >> >> >> >> Both being hardware agnostic and OS agnostic make sense at a certain level. >> But I feel like Sugar Labs needs one or more well defined flagship products >> to focus on. That gives us something to market, to test, to design for. >> >> The only Sugar based product which has really been successful until now is >> the XO. And that makes us still very dependent on OLPC strategies. >> >> Given the uncertainity of the OLPC situation (or rather it seems pretty >> certain that their investement on Sugar has been heavily scaled down), I >> think Sugar Labs should try to come up with another flagship product to >> focus on. Sugar on Raspberry? Sugar as a cross OS application? Sugar on some >> custom built (by who?) piece of hardware? I don't know but I feel it's >> something we will need to figure out. > > I think we should be having this discussion with the Sugar > deployments. They by-and-large remain committed to Sugar even if they > are uncertain about the base platform. > > -walter > > -- > Walter Bender > Sugar Labs > http://www.sugarlabs.org > ___ > Devel mailing list > de...@lists.laptop.org > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel -- Laura V. I&D SomosAZUCAR.Org Identi.ca/Skype acaire IRC kaametza Happy Learning! ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] Thanks
Since I finally mentioned that OLPC and I had parted ways in an earlier email, I really need to thank the OLPC community for providing me with the opportunity to work with you for the past seven years. Reuben continues to provide outstanding deployment support for all XO laptops, and I will still be available online for questions and deep support issues. Cheers, wad ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
On Oct 31, 2013, at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:04 AM, David Farning > wrote: >> I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical >> set of questions which will determine the future viability of Sugar. >> >> If anyone as more informed, please correct me if I am sharing >> incorrect information: >> 1. The Association has dropped future development of XO laptops and >> Sugar as part of their long term strategy. I base this on the >> reduction of hardware and software personal employed by the >> Association. >> 2. The Association is reducing its roll within the engineering and >> development side of the ecosystem. I base this on the shift toward >> integrating existing technology, software, and content from other >> vendors on the XO tablet. The Association continues to have an engineering effort, but it has been completely outsourced (mostly to MorphOSS) and almost entirely concentrated on the "XO Learning Software" for the tablet for the last six months. >> 3. The Association is shifting away from its initial roll as a >> technical philanthropy to a revenue generating organization structured >> as a association. I base this on the general shift in conversations >> and decisions from public to private channels. I have no knowledge about points 1 and 3. > My understanding of the XO Tablet project was that it was designed as > a revenue generator ($x per unit sale goes to OLPC A) so that work on > the XO-4 could continue. In my own conversations with OLPCA, I was > always reassured that the XO continues to be the pedagogical machine. > However, I'm not seeing the evidence to that end from OLPCA. Pretty > much all the staff that worked on the XO are either laid off or have > quit. > > There were other conversations at OLPC SF Summit, where the concern > was that OLPCA is quietly trying to convert requests for XO-4 > purchases into XO Tablet purchases. I've raised this issue of device > cannibalization with OLPCA. If the real plan is to keep both lines > going, then the devices should have separate marketing and sales > plans. Keep in mind that the XO4 has had close to zero marketing, and > all the media I see about OLPC these days usually positions the XO > Tablet as the new thing. > > Today's Wired article makes the intentions clearer: > http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-10/31/olpc-and-datawind-tablet > However, if all that OLPC remains is a vendor of cheap, proprietary > Android tablets wrapped in green silicone, then what motivation > remains to continue to plug for it? We all have different motivations > for working on this project. I'd like to hear more from others. OLPC was never about making cheap products --- it was about making a good product at the lowest possible cost. The Vivitar (XO) Tablet and the software associated with it are a complete departure from OLPC's previous engineering practices (and despite the marketing, had no input from the then-existing OLPC team.) Unfortunately, as you point out, there is little effort to market the XO-4 and instead a bewildering push to sell the Vivitar (XO) Tablet to large deployments despite its unsuitability for such.OLPC and I parted ways at the end of September. There are plenty of vendors of cheap Android tablets. Perhaps Walter is right that this is the time to concentrate on providing software designed for collaborative, joyful, advertising-free, self-empowered learning, in a hardware independent manner. The seven years since OLPC started have seen a huge improvement in MIPS/Watt and MIPS/$, making the hardware independent approach (Python, Java, HTML5) an even better approach. Regards, wad ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] service_name and bundle_id... again
2013/10/31 Daniel Narvaez : > The patch looks fine to me. I'm not sure the all caps ATTENTION is necessary > but if you want to keep it s/ATENTION/ATTENTION. And let's add the comment > about gtk2 we discussed before. Feel free to push with these changes. Yes, I pushed it yesterday, right after responding to this thread. I also noticed the mispelling and fixed it before pushing. Cheers, -- .. manuq .. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)
Congratulations to all the team! Gonzalo On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Dr. Gerald Ardito wrote: > This is really impressive. > Congratulations! > > Gerald > > On Oct 31, 2013 8:45 PM, "Daniel Narvaez" wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> we are proud to announce the release of Sugar 0.100.0. A lot is new for >> both users and developers, see the release notes >> >> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Notes >> >> Sources: >> >> >> http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-datastore/sugar-datastore-0.100.0.tar.xz >> >> http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-artwork/sugar-artwork-0.100.0.tar.xz >> >> http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-runner/sugar-runner-0.100.0.tar.xz >> >> http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar/sugar-0.100.1.tar.xz >> >> http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.100.0.tar.xz >> >> Thanks to everyone that contributed with code, translations and testing! >> >> -- >> Daniel Narvaez >> >> ___ >> Sugar-devel mailing list >> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel >> > > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
On 1 November 2013 03:22, Walter Bender wrote: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Daniel Narvaez > wrote: > > On 31 October 2013 19:31, Walter Bender wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma wrote: > >> > >> > Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder: > >> > > >> > Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's > >> > poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, > >> > low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for > >> > collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning. > >> > > >> > >> I think we all share concerns about the future of OLPCA (Indeed, I > >> left OLPC in 2008 to start Sugar Labs in part because of my concerns > >> about strategy and pedagogy.) That said, I continue to work in support > >> of OLPC's efforts since I believe that they are still a viable vehicle > >> to reach millions of children. But Sugar Labs is not OLPC. And Sugar > >> Labs has a future independent of OLPC. In 2008 we made a decision as a > >> community to be agnostic about hardware to the extent possible and > >> that is reflected in our code. In 2010, we made the decision to make > >> HTML5/Javascript a first-class development environment for Sugar with > >> the goals of both reaching more kids and attracting more developers. > >> This is work in progress, but we (Manuq and Daniel) have made great > >> strides. We face further challenges ahead. But our mission remains: > >> > >> to produce, distribute, and support the use of the Sugar learning > >> platform; it is a support base and gathering place for the community > >> of educators and developers to create, extend, teach, and learn with > >> the Sugar learning platform. > > > > > > > > Both being hardware agnostic and OS agnostic make sense at a certain > level. > > But I feel like Sugar Labs needs one or more well defined flagship > products > > to focus on. That gives us something to market, to test, to design for. > > > > The only Sugar based product which has really been successful until now > is > > the XO. And that makes us still very dependent on OLPC strategies. > > > > Given the uncertainity of the OLPC situation (or rather it seems pretty > > certain that their investement on Sugar has been heavily scaled down), I > > think Sugar Labs should try to come up with another flagship product to > > focus on. Sugar on Raspberry? Sugar as a cross OS application? Sugar on > some > > custom built (by who?) piece of hardware? I don't know but I feel it's > > something we will need to figure out. > > I think we should be having this discussion with the Sugar > deployments. They by-and-large remain committed to Sugar even if they > are uncertain about the base platform. > Absolutely! ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote: > On 31 October 2013 19:31, Walter Bender wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma wrote: >> >> > Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder: >> > >> > Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's >> > poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, >> > low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for >> > collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning. >> > >> >> I think we all share concerns about the future of OLPCA (Indeed, I >> left OLPC in 2008 to start Sugar Labs in part because of my concerns >> about strategy and pedagogy.) That said, I continue to work in support >> of OLPC's efforts since I believe that they are still a viable vehicle >> to reach millions of children. But Sugar Labs is not OLPC. And Sugar >> Labs has a future independent of OLPC. In 2008 we made a decision as a >> community to be agnostic about hardware to the extent possible and >> that is reflected in our code. In 2010, we made the decision to make >> HTML5/Javascript a first-class development environment for Sugar with >> the goals of both reaching more kids and attracting more developers. >> This is work in progress, but we (Manuq and Daniel) have made great >> strides. We face further challenges ahead. But our mission remains: >> >> to produce, distribute, and support the use of the Sugar learning >> platform; it is a support base and gathering place for the community >> of educators and developers to create, extend, teach, and learn with >> the Sugar learning platform. > > > > Both being hardware agnostic and OS agnostic make sense at a certain level. > But I feel like Sugar Labs needs one or more well defined flagship products > to focus on. That gives us something to market, to test, to design for. > > The only Sugar based product which has really been successful until now is > the XO. And that makes us still very dependent on OLPC strategies. > > Given the uncertainity of the OLPC situation (or rather it seems pretty > certain that their investement on Sugar has been heavily scaled down), I > think Sugar Labs should try to come up with another flagship product to > focus on. Sugar on Raspberry? Sugar as a cross OS application? Sugar on some > custom built (by who?) piece of hardware? I don't know but I feel it's > something we will need to figure out. I think we should be having this discussion with the Sugar deployments. They by-and-large remain committed to Sugar even if they are uncertain about the base platform. -walter -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] 0.102 focus and features
I may be incorrect, but I think the way it happened (during 0.88-94 days) was a feature was first proposed on the mailing list with the [FEATURE] tag in the subject line. It was then extensively discussed, and then at some later point a wiki page was created, which was (supposed to be) useful at the time of feature-freeze to make a go/no-go call for code-inclusion in mainline, so having the current state summarized in a wiki page was useful. (Just giving historical reference) On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 6:49 PM, James Cameron wrote: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:18:42PM -0400, Walter Bender wrote: > > Not sure there is too much more overhead for writing a wiki page vs > > writing an email. I don't recall hearing anything concrete about the > > feature proposal process recently. It has be refactored periodically, > > usually under the guidance of the release manager :) > > Agreed, the overhead isn't much; only about double the time, but it is > mostly borne by the feature proposer. The same template could be used > in e-mail, and this would give a discussion thread view rather than a > finished filled-in template view. As mostly a reader of the features, > I'm okay with either, but the Wiki doesn't show much in the way of the > discussion. > > -- > James Cameron > http://quozl.linux.org.au/ > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
On 31 October 2013 19:31, Walter Bender wrote: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma wrote: > > > Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder: > > > > Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's > > poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, > > low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for > > collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning. > > > > I think we all share concerns about the future of OLPCA (Indeed, I > left OLPC in 2008 to start Sugar Labs in part because of my concerns > about strategy and pedagogy.) That said, I continue to work in support > of OLPC's efforts since I believe that they are still a viable vehicle > to reach millions of children. But Sugar Labs is not OLPC. And Sugar > Labs has a future independent of OLPC. In 2008 we made a decision as a > community to be agnostic about hardware to the extent possible and > that is reflected in our code. In 2010, we made the decision to make > HTML5/Javascript a first-class development environment for Sugar with > the goals of both reaching more kids and attracting more developers. > This is work in progress, but we (Manuq and Daniel) have made great > strides. We face further challenges ahead. But our mission remains: > > to produce, distribute, and support the use of the Sugar learning > platform; it is a support base and gathering place for the community > of educators and developers to create, extend, teach, and learn with > the Sugar learning platform. Both being hardware agnostic and OS agnostic make sense at a certain level. But I feel like Sugar Labs needs one or more well defined flagship products to focus on. That gives us something to market, to test, to design for. The only Sugar based product which has really been successful until now is the XO. And that makes us still very dependent on OLPC strategies. Given the uncertainity of the OLPC situation (or rather it seems pretty certain that their investement on Sugar has been heavily scaled down), I think Sugar Labs should try to come up with another flagship product to focus on. Sugar on Raspberry? Sugar as a cross OS application? Sugar on some custom built (by who?) piece of hardware? I don't know but I feel it's something we will need to figure out. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] 0.102 focus and features
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 09:18:42PM -0400, Walter Bender wrote: > Not sure there is too much more overhead for writing a wiki page vs > writing an email. I don't recall hearing anything concrete about the > feature proposal process recently. It has be refactored periodically, > usually under the guidance of the release manager :) Agreed, the overhead isn't much; only about double the time, but it is mostly borne by the feature proposer. The same template could be used in e-mail, and this would give a discussion thread view rather than a finished filled-in template view. As mostly a reader of the features, I'm okay with either, but the Wiki doesn't show much in the way of the discussion. -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] 0.102 focus and features
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote: > On 1 November 2013 02:18, Walter Bender wrote: >> >> >> > 1 Bug fixes. In 0.100 we added several nice features but I think the >> >> > quality >> >> > of the core components is still not at a level we can be proud of. >> >> > Let's >> >> > try >> >> > to fix that for 0.102. >> >> >> >> Be nice to get a discussion going about where you see the problems. >> > >> > >> > Do you mean the concrete quality issues I'm seeing or the problems with >> > the >> > development process keeping quality low? >> > >> >> Both. > > > Ok. I will try to start a discussion. I need to put more thought into this > myself first... > >> I remember someone wasn't happy about the features proposal process. Maybe >> it was you but I'm not sure... Anyway that's something we can discuss now. >> I >> must admit I'm not even very familiar with feature pages requirements. As >> far as I'm concerned just explaining what you are planning to land on the >> mailing list would be enough. > >> Not sure there is too much more overhead for writing a wiki page vs >> writing an email. I don't recall hearing anything concrete about the >> feature proposal process recently. It has be refactored periodically, >> usually under the guidance of the release manager :) > > > Yeah it wasn't much about wiki vs mailing list but I guessed there was > formal requirements for what a feature proposal should look like etc. And I > hate formalities :) I never wrote a feature proposal myself... I thought I > heard someone complain in irc, but if people are happy I'm happy too! Where things get contentious tends to be in the user-facing bits. We've had to be diligent about keeping our sights on what is important to the learner. Not always fashionable. -walter -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] 0.102 focus and features
On 1 November 2013 02:18, Walter Bender wrote: > >> > 1 Bug fixes. In 0.100 we added several nice features but I think the > >> > quality > >> > of the core components is still not at a level we can be proud of. > Let's > >> > try > >> > to fix that for 0.102. > >> > >> Be nice to get a discussion going about where you see the problems. > > > > > > Do you mean the concrete quality issues I'm seeing or the problems with > the > > development process keeping quality low? > > > > Both. > Ok. I will try to start a discussion. I need to put more thought into this myself first... > I remember someone wasn't happy about the features proposal process. Maybe > it was you but I'm not sure... Anyway that's something we can discuss now. I > must admit I'm not even very familiar with feature pages requirements. As > far as I'm concerned just explaining what you are planning to land on the > mailing list would be enough. Not sure there is too much more overhead for writing a wiki page vs > writing an email. I don't recall hearing anything concrete about the > feature proposal process recently. It has be refactored periodically, > usually under the guidance of the release manager :) > Yeah it wasn't much about wiki vs mailing list but I guessed there was formal requirements for what a feature proposal should look like etc. And I hate formalities :) I never wrote a feature proposal myself... I thought I heard someone complain in irc, but if people are happy I'm happy too! ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] 0.102 focus and features
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote: > On 1 November 2013 02:01, Walter Bender wrote: >> >> > 1 Bug fixes. In 0.100 we added several nice features but I think the >> > quality >> > of the core components is still not at a level we can be proud of. Let's >> > try >> > to fix that for 0.102. >> >> Be nice to get a discussion going about where you see the problems. > > > Do you mean the concrete quality issues I'm seeing or the problems with the > development process keeping quality low? > Both. >> >> > 2 Web activities. There is consensus that it is the most important area >> > of >> > development for the future of the project. I think at the beginning of >> > the >> > cycle we should discuss where we are and decide more concretely which >> > areas >> > need work. >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > If there are features you are developing and you would like to get in >> > 0.102 >> > this is the time to let everyone know! >> >> We've got a few things queued up from the OZ work Gonzalo and I have >> been doing... Will write up the feature pages in the next few days. > > > I remember someone wasn't happy about the features proposal process. Maybe > it was you but I'm not sure... Anyway that's something we can discuss now. I > must admit I'm not even very familiar with feature pages requirements. As > far as I'm concerned just explaining what you are planning to land on the > mailing list would be enough. Not sure there is too much more overhead for writing a wiki page vs writing an email. I don't recall hearing anything concrete about the feature proposal process recently. It has be refactored periodically, usually under the guidance of the release manager :) > > In terms of timeframe I would like to get this discussion wrapped up in time > for the first release on December 1. +1 -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)
This is really impressive. Congratulations! Gerald On Oct 31, 2013 8:45 PM, "Daniel Narvaez" wrote: > Hello, > > we are proud to announce the release of Sugar 0.100.0. A lot is new for > both users and developers, see the release notes > > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Notes > > Sources: > > > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-datastore/sugar-datastore-0.100.0.tar.xz > > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-artwork/sugar-artwork-0.100.0.tar.xz > > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-runner/sugar-runner-0.100.0.tar.xz > > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar/sugar-0.100.1.tar.xz > > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.100.0.tar.xz > > Thanks to everyone that contributed with code, translations and testing! > > -- > Daniel Narvaez > > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [ASLO] Release FotoToon-17
Hi Iain, just wanted to mention the testing you are doing is really useful. Please keep it up! On 29 October 2013 00:04, Iain Brown Douglas wrote: > On Wed, 2013-10-23 at 11:19 -0400, Sugar Labs Activities wrote: > > > Sugar Platform: > > 0.96 - 0.100 > > > > Download Now: > > http://activities.sugarlabs.org/downloads/file/28804/fototoon-17.xo > > Testing this on sugar-build on Debian 7 > > FotoToon fails to start with this log: > > > 1382997097.687926 ERROR root: Setting dpi to: 96.00 > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "/home/broot/sugar-build/build/out/install/bin/sugar-activity", > line 164, in > main() > File "/home/broot/sugar-build/build/out/install/bin/sugar-activity", > line 122, in main > module = __import__(module_name) > File > "/home/broot/sugar-build/activities/FotoToon.activity/historietaactivity.py", > line 10, in > import persistencia > File > "/home/broot/sugar-build/activities/FotoToon.activity/persistencia.py", > line 2, in > import simplejson > ImportError: No module named simplejson > Exited with status 1, pid 3218 data (None, ', mode > 'w' at 0x38a39c0>, '922ebb18c82a00158252b3698f3dea0e6eda005b') > > Iain > > > Sugar Labs Activities > > http://activities.sugarlabs.org > > > > ___ > > Sugar-devel mailing list > > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] 0.102 focus and features
On 1 November 2013 02:01, Walter Bender wrote: > > 1 Bug fixes. In 0.100 we added several nice features but I think the > quality > > of the core components is still not at a level we can be proud of. Let's > try > > to fix that for 0.102. > > Be nice to get a discussion going about where you see the problems. > Do you mean the concrete quality issues I'm seeing or the problems with the development process keeping quality low? > > 2 Web activities. There is consensus that it is the most important area > of > > development for the future of the project. I think at the beginning of > the > > cycle we should discuss where we are and decide more concretely which > areas > > need work. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > If there are features you are developing and you would like to get in > 0.102 > > this is the time to let everyone know! > > We've got a few things queued up from the OZ work Gonzalo and I have > been doing... Will write up the feature pages in the next few days. > I remember someone wasn't happy about the features proposal process. Maybe it was you but I'm not sure... Anyway that's something we can discuss now. I must admit I'm not even very familiar with feature pages requirements. As far as I'm concerned just explaining what you are planning to land on the mailing list would be enough. In terms of timeframe I would like to get this discussion wrapped up in time for the first release on December 1. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] 0.102 focus and features
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote: > Hello, > > as for 0.100 I suggest we have an early discussion on what the focus of the > release should be. Exception could be made down the road but in general we > should try to stick to the plan. > > Here is my proposal > > 1 Bug fixes. In 0.100 we added several nice features but I think the quality > of the core components is still not at a level we can be proud of. Let's try > to fix that for 0.102. Be nice to get a discussion going about where you see the problems. > 2 Web activities. There is consensus that it is the most important area of > development for the future of the project. I think at the beginning of the > cycle we should discuss where we are and decide more concretely which areas > need work. > > Thoughts? > > If there are features you are developing and you would like to get in 0.102 > this is the time to let everyone know! We've got a few things queued up from the OZ work Gonzalo and I have been doing... Will write up the feature pages in the next few days. -walter > > -- > Daniel Narvaez > > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
On 29 October 2013 20:29, David Farning wrote: > Phase two -- Let's look at lessons learned from other projects. We can > focus on the road map and product specification. From my experience, > these two piece can provide an anchor for the rest of the project: > 1. The act of sitting down and hashing out the roadmap and project > specification causes everyone to sit back and assess their individual > priorities and goals and how they fit into the project as a whole. > 2. The act of deciding which items are above the line and which are > below the line, which are targeted for this release and which are > pushed to a future release, help find the balance between what is > possible some day and what is probable in X months of work with > existing resources. > 3. Sitting back and preparing for a release forces us to asses what is > good enough for release what is not. It is a good feedback loop. > 4. Finally, after a successful release everyone can sit back bask is > the satisfaction that maybe we didn't save the world... but we make > enough progress that it is worth getting up again tomorrow and doing > it all again. > Hi David, I just started a thread about 0.102 focus and features. If you want to get involved defining the upstream roadmap there is your chance! For 0.100 we kept that very very simple, a short list of new features basically. But if you want to contribute with a product specification I think that would be awesome. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] 0.102 focus and features
Hello, as for 0.100 I suggest we have an early discussion on what the focus of the release should be. Exception could be made down the road but in general we should try to stick to the plan. Here is my proposal 1 Bug fixes. In 0.100 we added several nice features but I think the quality of the core components is still not at a level we can be proud of. Let's try to fix that for 0.102. 2 Web activities. There is consensus that it is the most important area of development for the future of the project. I think at the beginning of the cycle we should discuss where we are and decide more concretely which areas need work. Thoughts? If there are features you are developing and you would like to get in 0.102 this is the time to let everyone know! -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] 0.100 branch
Hello, I created stable branches for 0.100, called sucrose-0.100 following the usual naming scheme. I suggest we decide if and when to make more stable releases as we go. Basically just send patches for the branch or push new translations to pootle and request a release on the mailing list when you would like to have one. Thoughts? -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.102 schedule
Hello, here is the proposed schedule for 0.102 0.101.0 - 12/01/13 0.101.1 - 01/01/14 0.101.2 - 02/01/14 0.101.3 - 03/01/14 - Feature freeze 0.101.4 - 04/01/14 - String, UI, API freeze 0.102.0 - 05/01/14 - Final release I entered it in trac already. http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/roadmap Thoughts? ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Arch Linux XO image and Sugar packages
Hi Christophe, sorry for the delay. I haven't tried your packages yet because being a developer I prefer to work from git master... though it's great to have stable packages for Arch of course! Now that 0.100 is out you should be able to get rid of the python2 sed stuff simplifying the PKGBUILDs a bit. On 14 October 2013 12:37, Christophe Guéret wrote: > Hello, > > Nice! I'm maintaining a couple of packages in AUR using the version of the > packages shipped in the latest stable release (currently the 13.2.0). > Please, let me know if these package do not work for you and if they need > to be fixed ;-) > > Cheers, > Christophe > > > On 6 October 2013 01:59, Daniel Narvaez wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> I recently switched to Arch Linux and I put together a couple of things >> that others might find useful. >> >> * A trivial script to build minimal images for the XO. It builds a >> kernel from the OLPC git repository and put it together with prebuilt >> packages from the Arch Linux ARM project. It's enough to setup a wifi >> connection and install more stuff with pacman. It's XO 1.75 specific at the >> moment, but it should be easy to make it work on other versions. >> >> https://github.com/dnarvaez/archxo >> >> I will post a prebuilt image later. >> >> * AUR -git packages for the Sugar core and the browse activity. They >> makes it pretty easy to install the very latest sugar. (I tested them on my >> laptop, not on the XO yet). >> >> All of these are very much a work in progress. I'm posting them mostly >> because they might be of interest for Arch Linux users. Patches and bug >> reports both appreciated! >> >> -- >> Daniel Narvaez >> > > > > -- > Onderzoeker > +31(0)6 14576494 > christophe.gue...@dans.knaw.nl > > *Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)* > DANS bevordert duurzame toegang tot digitale onderzoeksgegevens. > Kijk op www.dans.knaw.nl voor meer informatie en contactgegevens. > DANS is een instituut van KNAW en NWO. > > *Let's build a World Wide Semantic Web!* > http://worldwidesemanticweb.org/ > > *e-Humanities Group (KNAW)* > http://ehumanities.nl/ > > > > > ___ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > i...@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)
Bravo!! Great job. -walter On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:45 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote: > Hello, > > we are proud to announce the release of Sugar 0.100.0. A lot is new for both > users and developers, see the release notes > > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Notes > > Sources: > > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-datastore/sugar-datastore-0.100.0.tar.xz > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-artwork/sugar-artwork-0.100.0.tar.xz > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-runner/sugar-runner-0.100.0.tar.xz > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar/sugar-0.100.1.tar.xz > http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.100.0.tar.xz > > Thanks to everyone that contributed with code, translations and testing! > > -- > Daniel Narvaez > > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] Sugar 0.100.0 (stable)
Hello, we are proud to announce the release of Sugar 0.100.0. A lot is new for both users and developers, see the release notes http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.100/Notes Sources: http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-datastore/sugar-datastore-0.100.0.tar.xz http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-artwork/sugar-artwork-0.100.0.tar.xz http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-runner/sugar-runner-0.100.0.tar.xz http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar/sugar-0.100.1.tar.xz http://download.sugarlabs.org/sources/sucrose/glucose/sugar-toolkit-gtk3/sugar-toolkit-gtk3-0.100.0.tar.xz Thanks to everyone that contributed with code, translations and testing! -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
[Sugar-devel] JAMediaEditor
Bueno, luego de muchos meses de trabajo con Cristian y Nacho, tenemos la primera versión de JAMediaEditor para Sugar y Gnome. Esta aplicación se basa en trabajos previos realizados entre Activity Central y Batoví Games Studio. *Dentro de las características más interesantes del editor, (desde mi punto de vista), tenemos que:* 1. Utiliza JAMediaPyGiHack para desplegar cualquier API python instalada en el sistema con lo cual el usuario posee una guía completa de desarrollo dentro del mismo editor. 2. Automatiza la construcción de paquetes instaladores de proyectos para su distribución. Contiene 3 tipos de instaladores: para gnome, para "gnome ceibal" y para sugar. Para las siguientes versiones vamos a dedicar tiempo a desarrollar guías de desarrollo y ejemplos. En esta primera versión pienso que esa es la carencia más importante que posee ya que la idea es que sea utilizada principalmente por aquellos niños y jóvenes que comienzan a programar en python y es necesario que ellos tengan guías y ejemplos a mano. [image: Imágenes integradas 1] http://activities.sugarlabs.org/es-ES/sugar/addon/4716 https://sites.google.com/site/sugaractivities/jamediaobjects/jamediaeditor JAMediaEditor, JAMediaPyGiHack y JAMediaTerminal, conforman una serie de aplicaciones que pretenden ayudar a quienes recién comienzan a programar en python, todas se pueden instalar en forma independiente tanto en sugar como gnome. (JAMediaEditor encapsula las tres aplicaciones en una sola). Pueden ver JAMediaPyGiHack en: https://sites.google.com/site/sugaractivities/jamediaobjects/jamediapygihack Y JAMediaTerminal en: https://sites.google.com/site/sugaractivities/jamediaobjects/jamediaterminal Se reciben reportes de bugs y sugerencias para mejorarlas :P ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations
Hi, Sameer I've tried to sit on my hands in this discussion. I agree with your assessment completely. I had the opportunity to talk with Ruben Rodriguez at the sprint. He has Sugar running (under Ubuntu) on a Nexus 7 and on a standard PC. I have one of each to test this. The Nexus 7 together with a bluetooth keyboard and holder makes a reasonable physical package. I found a refurbished Gateway identical to my netbook at less than $200. I plan to use that also for testing. My previous netbook (Asus eeepc which has since become unable had Ubuntu installed on top of Windows (using the D: drive space). I installed it with wubi which enables Windows and Ubuntu to be dual-booted (by grub which pushes Windows down to the slot below the memory test). I hope this setup will work with Sugar. In effect, it is possible that deployments can use Classmates or Android tabllets (with a keyboard) as alternatives to XOs going forward. Yours, Tony On 10/31/2013 07:04 PM, sugar-devel-requ...@lists.sugarlabs.org wrote: So, with regard to the points above, several concerns along these lines were voiced at OLPC SF Summit. Most of these were in private corridor/coffee conversations, but I got to hear a bulk of it, being the lead organizer. Opinions and concerns varied from "I'm confused by what OLPC is doing", to "Are we not doing XOs anymore?" to "What about Sugar?" to "It was good ride, but it's over. Time to move along". Two other points to note for this year's meeting: The attendance was the lowest it's ever been, and we barely saw anyone pull out their XOs to work with. Neither observations were encouraging, to put it mildly. My understanding of the XO Tablet project was that it was designed as a revenue generator ($x per unit sale goes to OLPC A) so that work on the XO-4 could continue. In my own conversations with OLPCA, I was always reassured that the XO continues to be the pedagogical machine. However, I'm not seeing the evidence to that end from OLPCA. Pretty much all the staff that worked on the XO are either laid off or have quit. There were other conversations at OLPC SF Summit, where the concern was that OLPCA is quietly trying to convert requests for XO-4 purchases into XO Tablet purchases. I've raised this issue of device cannibalization with OLPCA. If the real plan is to keep both lines going, then the devices should have separate marketing and sales plans. Keep in mind that the XO4 has had close to zero marketing, and all the media I see about OLPC these days usually positions the XO Tablet as the new thing. Today's Wired article makes the intentions clearer: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-10/31/olpc-and-datawind-tablet So, is the XO-4 dead? My first reaction would be "No", although I'm still to very confident of my own assessment. We are seeing continued adoption of the XO in Rwanda (I hear Rwanda is 1.75, but not 4) and Australia. They must see some continued value in it, and perhaps that will help in continuing to foster the ecosystem around it. We also have the approx. 3 million machines around the world, and many are still chugging away. Personally, the move within the Sugar community to web services and HTML5 is very encouraging. However, if all that OLPC remains is a vendor of cheap, proprietary Android tablets wrapped in green silicone, then what motivation remains to continue to plug for it? We all have different motivations for working on this project. I'd like to hear more from others. Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder: Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning. Does the current stance at OLPCA help in furthering this mission? Sameer ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] service_name and bundle_id... again
Was already pushed by manuq. Gonzalo On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote: > The patch looks fine to me. I'm not sure the all caps ATTENTION is necessary > but if you want to keep it s/ATENTION/ATTENTION. And let's add the comment > about gtk2 we discussed before. Feel free to push with these changes. > > > On 30 October 2013 15:27, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: >> >> Today I received this mail from Esteban Arias in Uruguay: >> >> " >> Cuando sugar cambió el toolbar, o cuando se pasó a gtk3, se mantuvo >> compatibilidad hacia atrás. >> Pero al pasar a sugar 0.98 varias de las actividades dejaron de funcionar >> por tener service_name en lugar de bundle_id enel activity.info. >> Existe alguno parche o alguna solución para evitar cambiar todos los >> activity.info de las actividades? >> >> " >> Translation: >> "When sugar changed the toolbar, or when changed to gtk3, background >> compatibility >> was maintained. But with the change to 0.98 several activities stoped >> working because >> have service_name instead of bundle_id in activity.info. >> There are a patch or fix to avoid change the activity.info file in every >> activity?" >> >> Similar mails reporting errors in activities, and finally found the >> problem is related to this >> change are received regularly in support mailing lists as iaep or >> support-gang. >> >> I wanted try what is needed change to make that activities work, and the >> change is really small. Attached is a patch to sugar-toolkit-gtk3. From my >> part I think we have broken >> compatibility without a good reason in this case, and should be solved. >> >> What you think about include it in Sugar? >> >> Gonzalo >> >> ___ >> Sugar-devel mailing list >> Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel >> > > > > -- > Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] service_name and bundle_id... again
The patch looks fine to me. I'm not sure the all caps ATTENTION is necessary but if you want to keep it s/ATENTION/ATTENTION. And let's add the comment about gtk2 we discussed before. Feel free to push with these changes. On 30 October 2013 15:27, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: > Today I received this mail from Esteban Arias in Uruguay: > > " > Cuando sugar cambió el toolbar, o cuando se pasó a gtk3, se mantuvo > compatibilidad hacia atrás. > Pero al pasar a sugar 0.98 varias de las actividades dejaron de funcionar > por tener *service_name* en lugar de* bundle_id *enel activity.info. > Existe alguno parche o alguna solución para evitar cambiar todos los > activity.info de las actividades? > > " > Translation: > "When sugar changed the toolbar, or when changed to gtk3, background > compatibility > was maintained. But with the change to 0.98 several activities stoped > working because > have service_name instead of bundle_id in activity.info. > There are a patch or fix to avoid change the activity.info file in every > activity?" > > Similar mails reporting errors in activities, and finally found the > problem is related to this > change are received regularly in support mailing lists as iaep or > support-gang. > > I wanted try what is needed change to make that activities work, and the > change is really small. Attached is a patch to sugar-toolkit-gtk3. From my > part I think we have broken > compatibility without a good reason in this case, and should be solved. > > What you think about include it in Sugar? > > Gonzalo > > ___ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > -- Daniel Narvaez ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:10:40AM -0700, Sameer Verma wrote: > [...] We are seeing continued adoption of the XO in Rwanda (I hear > Rwanda is 1.75, but not 4) and Australia. [...] I can confirm that Rwanda is using XO-1.75, not XO-4. You can find this information, albeit without quantities, in the Manufacturing Data table on the Wiki, for SKU234 and SKU235. http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Manufacturing_data At the moment, both XO-1.75 and XO-4 can be mass produced. (XO-1.75 has a cost advantage per child over XO-4, but without touchscreen, and a slightly slower processor. More children can be deployed to for the same overall project budget.) -- James Cameron http://quozl.linux.org.au/ ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Sameer Verma wrote: > Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder: > > Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's > poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, > low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for > collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning. > I think we all share concerns about the future of OLPCA (Indeed, I left OLPC in 2008 to start Sugar Labs in part because of my concerns about strategy and pedagogy.) That said, I continue to work in support of OLPC's efforts since I believe that they are still a viable vehicle to reach millions of children. But Sugar Labs is not OLPC. And Sugar Labs has a future independent of OLPC. In 2008 we made a decision as a community to be agnostic about hardware to the extent possible and that is reflected in our code. In 2010, we made the decision to make HTML5/Javascript a first-class development environment for Sugar with the goals of both reaching more kids and attracting more developers. This is work in progress, but we (Manuq and Daniel) have made great strides. We face further challenges ahead. But our mission remains: to produce, distribute, and support the use of the Sugar learning platform; it is a support base and gathering place for the community of educators and developers to create, extend, teach, and learn with the Sugar learning platform. -walter -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Private vs Public conversations.
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 9:04 AM, David Farning wrote: > I just wanted to bump this line of questions as, it is the critical > set of questions which will determine the future viability of Sugar. > > If anyone as more informed, please correct me if I am sharing > incorrect information: > 1. The Association has dropped future development of XO laptops and > Sugar as part of their long term strategy. I base this on the > reduction of hardware and software personal employed by the > Association. > 2. The Association is reducing its roll within the engineering and > development side of the ecosystem. I base this on the shift toward > integrating existing technology, software, and content from other > vendors on the XO tablet. > 3. The Association is shifting away from its initial roll as a > technical philanthropy to a revenue generating organization structured > as a association. I base this on the general shift in conversations > and decisions from public to private channels. > So, with regard to the points above, several concerns along these lines were voiced at OLPC SF Summit. Most of these were in private corridor/coffee conversations, but I got to hear a bulk of it, being the lead organizer. Opinions and concerns varied from "I'm confused by what OLPC is doing", to "Are we not doing XOs anymore?" to "What about Sugar?" to "It was good ride, but it's over. Time to move along". Two other points to note for this year's meeting: The attendance was the lowest it's ever been, and we barely saw anyone pull out their XOs to work with. Neither observations were encouraging, to put it mildly. My understanding of the XO Tablet project was that it was designed as a revenue generator ($x per unit sale goes to OLPC A) so that work on the XO-4 could continue. In my own conversations with OLPCA, I was always reassured that the XO continues to be the pedagogical machine. However, I'm not seeing the evidence to that end from OLPCA. Pretty much all the staff that worked on the XO are either laid off or have quit. There were other conversations at OLPC SF Summit, where the concern was that OLPCA is quietly trying to convert requests for XO-4 purchases into XO Tablet purchases. I've raised this issue of device cannibalization with OLPCA. If the real plan is to keep both lines going, then the devices should have separate marketing and sales plans. Keep in mind that the XO4 has had close to zero marketing, and all the media I see about OLPC these days usually positions the XO Tablet as the new thing. Today's Wired article makes the intentions clearer: http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-10/31/olpc-and-datawind-tablet So, is the XO-4 dead? My first reaction would be "No", although I'm still to very confident of my own assessment. We are seeing continued adoption of the XO in Rwanda (I hear Rwanda is 1.75, but not 4) and Australia. They must see some continued value in it, and perhaps that will help in continuing to foster the ecosystem around it. We also have the approx. 3 million machines around the world, and many are still chugging away. Personally, the move within the Sugar community to web services and HTML5 is very encouraging. However, if all that OLPC remains is a vendor of cheap, proprietary Android tablets wrapped in green silicone, then what motivation remains to continue to plug for it? We all have different motivations for working on this project. I'd like to hear more from others. Here's OLPC's mission, as a reminder: Mission Statement: To create educational opportunities for the world's poorest children by providing each child with a rugged, low-cost, low-power, connected laptop with content and software designed for collaborative, joyful, self-empowered learning. Does the current stance at OLPCA help in furthering this mission? Sameer > Given financial constraints, these are reasonable shifts. While > painful, the world is better of with a leaner (and meaner) OLPC > Association which lives to fight another day. The challenge moving > forward is how to develop and maintain the Sugar platform, the > universe of activities, and the supporting distributions given the > reduction in patronage from the OLPC Association. > > I, and AC, would be happy to work more closely with Sugar Labs if > there are ways to establish publicly disclosed and mutually beneficial > relationships. In the meantime we are happy to provide deployments > support while seeding and supporting projects we feel are beneficial > to deployments such as School Server Community Edition and Sugar on > Ubuntu. > > On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 6:11 AM, David Farning > wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: >>> I agree with your analysis about slow deployment updates versus fast >>> community cycles. >>> >>> In my view, there are two alternatives: >>> >>> * We can slow down a little the Sugar cycle, may be doing one release by >>> year, >>> but I am not sure if will help. The changes will take more time to go to the
