An OLPC Development Model

Bert Freudenberg bert at
Wed May 7 17:45:42 EDT 2008

On 07.05.2008, at 23:04, C. Scott Ananian wrote:

> On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 4:22 PM, Bert Freudenberg  
> <bert at> wrote:
>> On 07.05.2008, at 22:11, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
>>>> And it's certainly no coincidence that the list of activities in
>>>> olpc3
>>>> is what Kim wanted in ticket 6598. You certainly remember the
>>>> discussions.
>>> You're on crack, Bert.  *None* of the activities listed in 6598  
>>> are in
>>> the core build.
>> Maybe I am hallucinating this:
> That's not the core build.  That's Dennis' private playground.

I was talking about the "olpc3" build (it's still cited above for  
reference). I don't know exactly which build you mean by "core", but  
probably update.1.

Maybe it's all obvious to you. Here is how it looks from the outside:  
A new build series is started next to the official update.1 build.  
Lacking any announcement to clarify things, is it really so wrong to  
assume this has some significance? In particular when the other  
experimental builds (joyride and faster) are on a different server?  
And when I then look at what activities are installed, is it so wrong  
to wonder why *exactly* those 7 activities are installed that "we are  
currently supporting at OLPC and should be part of builds going  
forward" (Kim's words)? I concede this is not your fault, but please  
do not pretend this list of blessed activities would not exist.

> Didn't we go over that already?

The olpc3 build was not discussed before today, as far as I know.  
Certainly not before it was out there.

- Bert -

More information about the Devel mailing list