Michael,<br><br>I took some of your thoughts... and the 'global' problem of no activities shipped with XOs. ... ran with it a bit further. . . . :-)<br><br>Thinking along the lines, the set of 'recommended' activities per deployment location are being discussed informally, without much tracking or public-wide awareness... or input..<br>
<br>I couldn't find a good list of activities bundled for each deployment, so I created a wiki page..<br>
<a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Peru_bundled_activities">http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Peru_bundled_activities</a><br>and <br> <a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/go/G1G1_bundled_activities">http://wiki.laptop.org/go/G1G1_bundled_activities</a><br>
<br>All from some 'inspirational' text I added on page. . . <br> <a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Getting_involved_in_OLPC#Upstream_Free_Software_Projects">http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Getting_involved_in_OLPC#Upstream_Free_Software_Projects</a><br>
<br><i>"For each deployment location, OLPC staff will also work with local
administrators and volunteers to develop a consistent set of 'core
bundled activities'. To be installed on all base-software laptops
deployed in that area. For examples, see <a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Peru_bundled_activities" title="Peru bundled activities">Peru bundled activities</a> and <a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php?title=G1G1_bundled_activities&action=edit" class="new" title="G1G1 bundled activities">G1G1 bundled activities</a>."</i><br>
<br>I used the term 'bundled' until there's consensus on terminology to use. I've read other terms such as 'core' (see wiki category) and 'activity packs' (latest discussion on devel list).<br>
<br>I especially see this type of resource developing for coming up with a set of activities for the G1G1 users, planning and looking forward to the future... where some folks update to Update.1-700 (or newer), and get the interesting surprise of no activities and no easy method of downloading them.<br>
<br>Thoughts or continuations of these ideas? :-)<br>-Ixo<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Michael Stone <<a href="mailto:michael@laptop.org">michael@laptop.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Dear devel,<br>
<br>
While drafting release notes for Update.1 RC2 (signed update.1-699), we<br>
realized that we need a good story about what we want the ecosystem of<br>
activity and library packs (for use with the customization key [1]) to<br>
be.<br>
<br>
The rough sense emerging from the folks I've interviewed so far<br>
(dgilmore, kimquirk, walter, cjb) is that:<br>
<br>
* activity packs are collections maintained by public maintainers<br>
<br>
* people running deployments are responsible for choosing activities<br>
that work for them and we should assist in this process<br>
<br>
* for the moment, any activity packs that we provide are just<br>
conveniences and advice to them on how to get started<br>
<br>
* however, we should do our best to keep authoritative versions of all<br>
activities we encounter and to encourage other folks to mirror this<br>
content<br>
<br>
* to the extent that we are able, we should record the compatibility<br>
matrix between builds and activities<br>
<br>
However, there are several questions that these rough thoughts do not<br>
yet address:<br>
<br>
* what assistance are we obligated to provide to deployments?<br>
<br>
* if we discover notable flaws (security, legal, "objectionable<br>
content") in bundles that a deployment is using, what should we do?<br>
<br>
* in particular, whose responsibility is it to initiate communication<br>
of this sort?<br>
<br>
* (and others not listed here)<br>
<br>
Thoughts?<br>
<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
[1]: <a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Customization_key" target="_blank">http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Customization_key</a><br></blockquote></div><br>