On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 11:05 PM, Mikus Grinbergsmi...@bga.com wrote:
[For whoever deleted from laptop.org the webpage listing optional Activities
for build 767 systems -- thanks a lot, NOT.]
That would be bad (we have lots of our real users -- kids -- still on
767, and even earlier), so I
2009/8/17 Mikus Grinbergs mi...@bga.com:
Is XO-1.5 software expected to run Activities marked for 0.86 ?
If we are shipping Sugar 0.84, the answer is no (due to API incompatibility).
The current build tools pulls in the latest stable activities from
ASLO somewhat blindly (as per my
I asked once before, but got no answer:
| When the XO-1.5 on F11 software is eventually deployed (e.g.,
| installed by the factory), what level of Sugar will it provide ?
I just installed 'write-66.xo' on a Parrish XO-1 build on my XO-1.
It failed to launch, because its python code could not
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Mikus Grinbergsmi...@bga.com wrote:
I asked once before, but got no answer:
| When the XO-1.5 on F11 software is eventually deployed (e.g.,
| installed by the factory), what level of Sugar will it provide ?
I just installed 'write-66.xo' on a Parrish XO-1
Mikus,
Many of us would like an answer to that question sooner rather than
later But, in OLPCs defence it is a very difficult issues. The
two issues are:
1. Increasing the number of deployed versions greatly increases the
cost of support.
2. While recent versions of Sugar have additional
Is XO-1.5 software expected to run Activities marked for 0.86 ?
If we are shipping Sugar 0.84, the answer is no (due to API incompatibility).
The current build tools pulls in the latest stable activities from
ASLO somewhat blindly (as per my understanding)
I am interpreting this answer to
Hi Mikus,
So it comes down to the ASLO release date (published 0.86
target is September), vs. the XO-1.5 release (to production)
date (published target is later in 2009). Test time against
0.84 is accumulating -- but test time against 0.86 appears
doubtful.
That's right. We
