Walter,
I will try. I am moving on Feb 3 to Palawan. I'll try to get to it then.
My principal concern re GSOC is to define projects with manageable scope
- many of the past projects ended undelivered.
Tony
On 1/21/19 3:10 PM, Walter Bender wrote:
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Came
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 8:31 PM James Cameron wrote:
> Over the past few days, we've had more discussion in Gitter than IRC.
>
> We still have Thomas (satellit) in IRC.
>
I'll deal with wherever(s).
>
> --
> James Cameron
> http://quozl.netrek.org/
>
Over the past few days, we've had more discussion in Gitter than IRC.
We still have Thomas (satellit) in IRC.
--
James Cameron
http://quozl.netrek.org/
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sug
;
> > Although I would be happy to see contributions made to improve the
> > website, I am not in favor of adding this as a GSoC Project.
> > FYI, there are plans of A/B testing of the website, though I don't know
> the
> > current status.
> >
>
Thanks. But my vote is no.
It's not three months of coding.
It doesn't solve a problem we have with our software products; Sugar,
activities, Music Blocks, or Sugarizer.
Our problem with the web site is with the content, in turn because we
have had few content producers, and too many people pro
Greetings,
So I’ve been making a couple research about this for while now,
visiting several orgs that does something similar us @samswag helped
with some links, all in the attempt to give our website what it take
to be entertaining and highly engaging, relate a lot more with our
targeted audience
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019, 11:12 PM Rahul Bothra My idea was to see how many people are willing
> to move to Gitter, and if it be helpful for new contributors.
> I've observed this to the only criteria in my recent (radical)
> decisions and they've mostly been poorly thought out,
> for us as an organis
in favor of adding this as a GSoC Project.
> > FYI, there are plans of A/B testing of the website, though I don't know
> the
> > current status.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Rahul
> > ___
> > Sugar-devel
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:47 PM Samson Goddy
wrote:
> Sugar Labs Social was never a GSoC project, I don't understand why
> you keep bringing it up
Thanks, I know. I simply pointed that it never reached deployment,
though I'm sure people working on it even as we speak.
> Any "coding" project tha
My two cents re GSoC: from the very beginning of our involvement, I have
thought of it as an opportunity for us to take some risks and explore new
ideas. That being said, it is incumbent upon us to provide good mentoring
and follow through.
-walter
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 12:18 PM Samson Goddy
w
Thanks James and Alex, I've reviewed all comments and suggestions.
For most of the suggestions, I found no alternate but to use IRC. My
idea was to see how many people are willing to move to Gitter, and if
it be helpful for new contributors.
I've observed this to the only criteria in my recent (ra
Just for some point of correction.
Sugar Labs Social was never a GSoC project, I don't understand why you
keep bringing it up. Any "coding" project that is related to Sugar Lab's
goals or leads to improvement to the mission is eligible as a Gsoc project.
Some project requires more than 3 months
Hello,
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 7:44 PM Amaan Iqbal
wrote:
> I see we only have 6 projects so far in our Ideas list in comparison to
11
> which were selected in GSoC last year. Being a successful Open Source
> organization, I sincerely hope we have the potential of having many more
> projects in G
Hello,
I see we only have 6 projects so far in our Ideas list in comparison to 11
which were selected in GSoC last year. Being a successful Open Source
organization, I sincerely hope we have the potential of having many more
projects in GSoC this year(most probably 15+ if we can come up with such
On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM James Cameron wrote:
> Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever going to
> achieve all that. It was to enable a shutdown of the unmaintained
> gitorious instance at git.sugarlabs.org. Which still hasn't happened
> because it is still useful, in tu
Hi, James
This is a disagreement with Walter from day one. ASLO is a means to
maintain the library of Sugar activities in use for nearly a decade.
Introducing gitHub created an obstacle for our users as contributors.
Another disagreement I have with Walter is the concept of replacing
ASLO. Th
Hi all,
I'm proud to announce the version 1.1 of Sugarizer, a taste of Sugar for
any device.
http://sugarizer.org
New in this winter Sugarizer version:
- MacOS: Sugarizer is now available as a native MacOS application. You
could download the DMG package here [10].
- Linux: Sugari
Fascinating, I never thought the move to GitHub was ever going to
achieve all that. It was to enable a shutdown of the unmaintained
gitorious instance at git.sugarlabs.org. Which still hasn't happened
because it is still useful, in turn because this community hasn't the
time to do the necessary l
18 matches
Mail list logo
