[sugar] Sugar USB testing

[rihoward1 at gmail.com]

You bring up a good point.  It would be good if the developers used  
XO and Sugar. We would see more progress  in software efficiency  
amongst other things.  I use Sugar most of the time as a G1G1 user  
when I am home and testing the latest bits.  I do have Ubuntu on an  
SD card but rarely boot to it.  Maybe once a month I boot to Ubuntu  
just to demonstrate to someone that it is possible.  I use another  
system for email.
To get developers eating dog food with the XO you would need the  
following:

1.) The Develop activity completed so it is usable for writing code  
in an efficient manner.  Too many problems with Develop Activity at  
the moment and does not seem to play well with build 767 (or maybe  
just existing bugs).

2.) An IMAP client Activity and corresponding IMAP server on a school  
server.  Perhaps UW IMAP http://www.washington.edu/imap/ or cyrus  
http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ .  This would permit email access with  
a rich user experience while leaving the messages on the server.

On Oct 7, 2008, at 7:02 PM, pgf at laptop.org wrote:

> marco pesenti gritti wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Walter Bender  
>> <walter.bender at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> CCing the Sugar list.
>
> and adding devel.
>
>>>
>>> It seems that one of the problems we will be encountering with  
>>> generic
>>> spins is footprint. Even a standard Ubuntu without Sugar was seeming
>>> too fat to load from a LiveCD on a Pentium 4 with 256K of DRAM.
>>
>> I'm planning to dogfood the Fedora LiveUSB and I'll have a look to
>> memory usage while doing so. In principle, unless there are relevant
>> memory costs given by running on a LiveUSB, I'd expect it to work
>> decently.
>
> i've been curious for a while -- can we have a show of hands for
> how many people dogfood the existing XO s/w?
>
> for my part, i don't, to the extent that i yum-install xfce and
> run that.  so there's little memory pressure, and i don't run
> activities, nor networkmanager.  but i'm still running the kernel
> and most of the system software.  i can quickly switch to running
> sugar, and i do, when i discover something that i think needs
> investigating on a more "real" installation.  i think even my
> limited "dogfooding" has been useful -- the bugs i've found or
> helped diagnose have tended to be power management issues, and
> some yum package management issues.
>
> i _really_ think we need to make the XO base _and_ sugar be a
> place that developers are comfortable living in.  our needs
> aren't quite the same as a school kid's, but i think there's a
> much bigger overlap than we often think.  with the advent of the
> fedora spin we're going to lose xo/sugar mindshare among our
> g1g1 and development users [1], and i think we need to think
> seriously about taking up that slack.  even if that means adding
> some "poweruser"-centric features which a grade-schooler would
> probably never use, it's worth considering, in return for the
> increased focus, and yes, discomfort it may cause.
>
> paul
> [1] but i think we'll gain in overall project mindshare, so in net
> i'm in favor of it.
> =---------------------
>  paul fox, pgf at laptop.org
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel