yes, this looks like a great start! I'm just getting my feet wet with development (got sugar-jhbuild working today! ;), and was wondering if anyone has had experience, or examples, of software on regular laptop collaborating with an XO? Is this even possible, and if it isn't then is there a way I can help make it happen? It would be great for me (and others!) if I could develop a mac or linux version of an activity and have them talk to its sister app on some XOs <div>
<br></div><div>Bobby<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 10:02 PM, John Gilmore <<a href="mailto:gnu@toad.com">gnu@toad.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">"Morgan Collett" <<a href="mailto:morgan.collett@gmail.com">morgan.collett@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
</div><div class="Ih2E3d">> I'm now working for OLPC, on improving activity collaboration.<br>
<br>
</div>This is great!<br>
<br>
The best thing OLPC could do to improve activity collaboration is to<br>
get it working for ordinary programs -- running on the X Window<br>
System, or on MacOSX, or Windows. Why doesn't AbiWord already<br>
collaborate with Write? Why doesn't Firefox collaborate with Browse?<br>
It's the same code base.<br>
<br>
Tying collaboration to Sugar is a losing strategy. Once the rest of<br>
the world figures out that *their* programs should be trivial to<br>
collaborate in too, they'll reimplement collaboration (likely in an<br>
incompatible way). Then Sugar's collaboration will be an orphan<br>
rather than the mainstream. Instead, if OLPC's collaboration code<br>
supported cross-platform collaboration, OLPC's model and its<br>
implementing code would spread throughout the whole computing<br>
infrastructure. And that would bring in a new pile of contributors,<br>
enhancing, debugging, and porting it everywhere.<br>
<br>
Easy collaboration is one of OLPC's key advantages over its<br>
competition. Making that a reality for all the kids (and adults) in<br>
the world requires a broader vision. Merely debugging what makes<br>
Sugar apps fail to collaborate under load, or getting a few more Sugar<br>
authors to add collaboration, won't suffice.<br>
<br>
John<br>
<br>
PS: If there is a simple way to install a couple of RPM's or DEB's, add<br>
a paragraph of code and a few automake macros, and add collaboration<br>
to any program written in C or C++, then please document it! (If on<br>
the other hand "it only works in Python" and "requires sugar-jhbuild"<br>
then there's some work to be done.)<br>
<br>
PPS: This review of AbiWord says:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.linux.com/feature/131852" target="_blank">http://www.linux.com/feature/131852</a><br>
<br>
The new AbiWord supposedly offers real-time document collaboration<br>
developed for the OLPC project and implemented by means of an<br>
experimental plugin. As per the AbiWord-2.6 release notes, there are<br>
three implementations of the plugin, one for the OLPC, and two (an<br>
XMPP-based one and a pure TCP/IP one) for Linux. The Linux plugins<br>
compiled without any issues, but AbiWord couldn't activate them. The<br>
plugin isn't currently available for Windows.<br>
<br>
[<a href="http://abiword.com" target="_blank">abiword.com</a> says the Windows plugin is available on 2.6.2 now. But<br>
I never did find the collab plugin, nor any documentation for it. The<br>
2.6.0 release notes imply that the three available collab plugins can't<br>
actually interoperate with each other!]<br>
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org">Devel@lists.laptop.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel" target="_blank">http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>