An OLPC Development Model

[Samuel Klein]

On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 4:11 PM, C. Scott Ananian <cscott at cscott.net> wrote:

> On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
> wrote:
> > On 07.05.2008, at 19:54, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Bert Freudenberg
> >  > <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
> >  Well, my trust in OLPC is being probed every other day. I take your
> >  word, and I trust a few other people there, but I also have to
> >  acknowledge that priorities at OLPC are changing.
>

It never hurts to be paranoid, but the educational priorities of our tool
and software development are not changing.  There are priorities that have
not been effectively set in that regard -- but your input there is part of
any decisions that are made.  Perhaps we could use an open working group to
review and set core activities that can guide the list of activities (and
specific versions) that is proposed for each release.

What people spend time discussing and worrying about has changed, and this
can distract from addressing issues such as what the best activty
presentation is for children and clasrooms in different settings -- one
reason that recent discussions on the education.project list have been great
to see and take part in.


> >  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.


For the record, I don't think Bert is on crack.

If there are any activities other than Browse and Journal included in even
experimental builds, I would like to see them include a core list, certainly
including etoys, log and terminal, for instance.

I've added my current thoughts on having fallback activities in /usr/share
to 2064.

Cheers,
  SJ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20080507/e159d370/attachment.html>