[Testing] first play with new XO 1.5 machines

[Martin Langhoff]

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Daniel Drake <dsd at laptop.org> wrote:
> 2009/10/22 Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org>:
>> What would be more reliable in the under a tree use case: ad-hoc or
>> mesh with a max of 1 hop?
>
> Mesh, since everyone does their own beaconing.

That's my guess too. But the hard-to-answer question is "how much more
reliable"? So we can answer "is it worth the big effort"?

> But they would both break our ideas of collaboration quite
> significantly.

IME, successful uses of under-a-tree are not using multi-hop -- at
least not to any advantage. Why do you say 1-hop mesh would break
significantly?

> One of the biggest headaches we have to deal with, even
> when we have infrastructure networks, is the bug where every XO has a
> different set of neighbours on the neighbourhood view.

That is true from a user PoV, but in practice it lives higher in the
stack -- Salut and Telepathy in general is where the issue lies. We
still have bugs there that are hard to fix.

I now realize we'd forgotten about Cerebro. If anyone is going to take
the hard road, it may be a viable option -- did we ever have a clear
plan of what it'd take to integrate it "fully" (where 'fully' means
that things "just work" at least roughly to where they do on 8.2.1).

cheers,



m
-- 
 martin.langhoff at gmail.com
 martin at laptop.org -- School Server Architect
 - ask interesting questions
 - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
 - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff