On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12 May 2014 21:07, Gonzalo Odiard <godi...@sugarlabs.org> wrote: > >> First, thanks for doing this work. >> >> > Thanks for helping out. > > >> I would like to take a step back and understand a bit better where we >>> want to go with this. Some random thoughts and questions. >>> >>> * To really understand how much work is left I think we need some good >>> testing, especially on the hardware related bits. I expect there will be >>> lots of small things to fix, but it would be good to understand as early as >>> possible if there are roadblocks. I'm a bad tester and I've never used the >>> XO much, so I'm often not sure what is a regression and what is not... thus >>> helping with this would be particularly appreciated. >>> >> >> This is a issue. If we have a Sugar with similar functionalities >> (settings and activities installed) we can request help from deployments >> and volunteers. >> > > Are you thinking to deployment specific settings and activities here? Or > some kind of subset/reference that is good enough for all the interested > deployments? > I think we should do a "generic" version. We can start with the activities used by example in AU, but add more based on deployment requests. In the xo-1 models space is a issue, but not so much in the others, and the benefit is have more testing. > > * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is >>> not. >>> >> >> We are not using it. I am pretty sure Nicaragua use it. >> > > Is AU using yum? > Yes, we use a deamon calling yum with a particular configuration. Recently I am testing dnf in F20, and I am impressed. If there are not downsides, could be nice use it. Gonzalo
_______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
