C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> I would like to nominate SJ and Adam for the role of interim
> community liason, as they've done a fantastic job to date
> building and nourishing their respective content and support
> communities.
SJ and Adam did a great job in the past to leverage and
organize the com
On 5/22/08, Bernie Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > e) A more broadly-focused "community news", agressively seeking out
> > and incorporating local as well as "offical OLPC" content
>
> Restoring the old weekly news posted to devel@ would be a good
> start. Perhaps even publishing the l
Indeed, one of the goals of Sugar Labs is to help build community
collaboration, so working together on organizing is a positive step
forward. I plan to start sending a weekly Sugar Digest out--but it
will not be comprehensive of all the OLPC comings and goings and it
will include Sugar in other ve
On Thu, 22 May 2008, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> On 5/22/08, Bernie Innocenti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> e) A more broadly-focused "community news", agressively seeking out
>>> and incorporating local as well as "offical OLPC" content
>>
>> Restoring the old weekly news posted to devel@ would
C. Scott Ananian schrieb:
> On 5/22/08, Yamandu Ploskonka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> To begin with, could we pinpoint _what_ we are looking in such a person?
>>
>> 1.- obsessive openness, not subject to OLPC NDA
>>
>
> I actually want the opposite. You are welcome to have a non-OLPC
On 5/22/08, Christoph Derndorfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> C. Scott Ananian schrieb:
> > On 5/22/08, Yamandu Ploskonka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > To begin with, could we pinpoint _what_ we are looking in such a
> person?
> > >
> > > 1.- obsessive openness, not subject to OLPC NDA
> >
> >
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 4:45 AM, Christoph Derndorfer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So you're basically looking for someone who doesn't mind being despised
> by both OLPC staff ("God, s/he keeps bugging me, how annoying!") and the
> community ("s/he knows more than s/he's telling us").
Nah. We all
C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> Below the line was never posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Community news continues
> to be published to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list, which is open
> (as far as I know). I guess the only thing that's changed is that it
> is no longer cc'ed to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Should it be?
On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 2:18 AM, Alex Belits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then the announcement should be:
Don't take it so seriously. It's a "vision" set of mockups, and the
different technical aspects of how to get there will be fleshed out in
time and discussed in [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And when I
Note that we *cannot* share much of the information about the possible
alternatives we are examining for Gen-2 hardware until decisions are
final; it is the basis of serious negotiations among competing parties,
under non-disclosure agreements.
The best we can do is share the conceptual ideas, bo
On 5/23/08, Jim Gettys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that we *cannot* share much of the information about the possible
> alternatives we are examining for Gen-2 hardware until decisions are
> final; it is the basis of serious negotiations among competing parties,
> under non-disclosure agre
Martin has a good point: we're still in the phase of basic things like
processor selection.
And one of the really major questions is what touch technology to use;
Mary Lou tells me there are many different technologies out there at the
moment; we'll have to make another big decision there at some
>> Note that we *cannot* share much of the information about the
>> possible alternatives we are examining for Gen-2 hardware
>> until decisions are final; it is the basis of serious negotiations
>> among competing parties, under non-disclosure agreements.
>
> Lest rumors of more OLPC secrets get s
On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Albert Cahalan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You ended up with
Lots of accusations :-( Have you successfully negotiated with hw
vendors over innovative gear at very low cost in the past?
We do make mistakes, and in some cases there are tradeoffs. It's part
of doing
Typo - I should have written:
> Grandstanding about the mistakes made is cheap, with the advantage that most
> people aren't
> familiar with the issues at hand.
Albert also wrote
> Minus the dollar figures of course, getting contracts out in
> public would be very good for you. Groklaw would be a
15 matches
Mail list logo
