[Sugar-devel] XO on Fedora 20 (was Re: [GSoC] Porting To Python3)
godiard at sugarlabs.org
Mon May 12 17:39:25 EDT 2014
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 6:37 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com> wrote:
> to be honest I haven't even evaluated alternative distributions because I
> don't think we would have enough resources to do it anyway. We are making
> minor changes to olpc-os-builder, rewriting it for another distribution
> would be a lot of work.
> On 12 May 2014 20:11, Jon Nettleton <jon.nettleton at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com>
>> > Hello,
>> > things are looking good so far, we already have all the models booting
>> > sugar 0.101 with wif apparentlyi working. I would like to take a step
>> > and understand a bit better where we want to go with this. Some random
>> > thoughts and questions.
>> > * To really understand how much work is left I think we need some good
>> > testing, especially on the hardware related bits. I expect there will be
>> > lots of small things to fix, but it would be good to understand as
>> early as
>> > possible if there are roadblocks. I'm a bad tester and I've never used
>> > XO much, so I'm often not sure what is a regression and what is not...
>> > helping with this would be particularly appreciated.
>> > * Which deployments are planning to ship 0.102 soon and hence are
>> > in this work? I know of AU. Maybe Uruguay?
>> > * Do we need to support all the XO models?
>> > * Should we contribute the olpc-os-builder changes back to OLPC or fork
>> > I don't know if OLPC will do any active development on the linux side of
>> > things, if not maybe better to turn this into a sugarlabs thing.
>> > * Are interested deployments using olpc-update? If I'm not mistake AU is
>> > not.
>> > * Do we care about maintaining the GNOME "dual boot"? I'm afraid we do,
>> > I want to make sure.
>> > * As I mentioned in some other thread I'm interested in setting up
>> > builds from sugar master. I have some vague plan of what it would look
>> > and wrote bits of it. The basic idea is that you would push changes to
>> > github and get images automatically built. I think this is good for
>> > testing but the same infrastructure could be used by deployments. Are
>> > interested in using this?
>> Why is all this work being put into Fedora 20? The maintenance window
>> is limited and as of the next release they won't even support non-KMS
>> drivers by default. Wouldn't make sense to look into a distribution
>> that provides and LTS release? Resources already seem to be limited
>> so having to chase after Fedora every 6 months to a year seems like a
>> waste of resources. The GTK3 and GNOME teams obviously have their
>> eyes on a different class of hardware than what is being used by
> Daniel Narvaez
SugarLabs - Software for children learning
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Devel