Mesh support very likely to miss Sugar 0.84

[Mikus Grinbergs]

> I'm not sure completely sure about deployments but how much are they
> actually used? "Two kids under a tree" don't technically need a mesh
> to collaborate (as cool as it sounds).

Concentrating on deployments risks "disrespecting" G1G1 purchasers.

>>>> In Sugar 0.84, will mesh at least be disabled, from the point of view
>>>> of Ohm and the kernel, so that the WiFi chip can be powered down when
>>>> it's not in use for WiFi?
>>
>> The language in the above quote implies that 'mesh' is disposable.
>> With help from this list, I've been successful in using a (manually
>> initiated) mesh between XOs running Joyride 2633.  PLEASE do not
>> take away my ability to do this !!
> 
> I'm not sure about mesh as such but I wonder how much the mesh is
> actually used in large deployments (I believe in at least one large
> deployment the network function was essentially nor used) or
> deployments generally but on the other side of things Fedora 10 and
> the associated NetworkMager 0.7 on which the non kernel side of OLPC
> networking is based supports also by default the sharing of wifi.

My point is that in 2008 I had (with mesh) a working environment for 
collaborating in locations where there was no wifi access.  My post 
was a plea to "not throw out something that already works".

> If there's issues with mesh would is be possible to add a "sharte my
> network" checkbox which automagically uses the network sharing options
> included in NM 0.7 to allow "Two kids under a tree" to collaborate
> without the mesh (unless they're both looking over the shoulders of
> each other anyway :-)

But mesh worked on the hardware I have, and can still (manually) be 
made to work with Joyride 2633.  Until I can (without replacing my 
XOs) see "network sharing options" working at Bald Cypress Mountain 
(far from civilization), to me that option does seem like vaporware.

Yes, two kids under a tree can communicate verbally.  But if they 
are cooperating on something tangible (text, images) - I seem to 
recall OLPC/Sugar saying there are advantages to "sharing" input 
entry and output journaling.

> My thoughts would be to have this a whole lot automated as why
> would/should some random "kid" care about what "wifi" and "mesh" mean.

I believe that if collaboration *is* important to the user, he will 
learn what the available tools can be used for (including any 
potential distinction between "interacting with peers under a tree" 
vs. "interacting with resources through wifi").

My thoughts regarding automation -- it's 'Mother knows best' (which 
is the opposite of 'please, Mother - I'd rather do it myself').


mikus