[Testing] first play with new XO 1.5 machines

Martin Langhoff martin.langhoff at gmail.com
Thu Oct 22 06:09:29 EDT 2009

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

> 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).


 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

More information about the Devel mailing list