Thanks Aaron! It is a good idea to use the projectdb, in general, although I am hesitant to recommend people ask for more than a couple of laptops there. We will actually not be able to meet very many requests for >2 or 3 laptops as the supply for the Developer's program is limited. <br>
<br>It probably requires a wider discussion to get a quantity of 'free' laptops to any group. So this has been a good discussion.<br><br>Having said that, I would encourage people to sign up for a laptop through the developer's program, if you don't have one yet. <br>
<br><a href="http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Developers_Program">http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Developers_Program</a><br><br>- kim<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 2:31 AM, Aaron Kaplan <<a href="mailto:aaron@lo-res.org">aaron@lo-res.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;"><br>
would it make sense to at least enter that request into the projectdb since that is what it was made for?<br>
(apart from the feature requests which will be taken care of at some time, it does hold the data and hence it can help in tracking the XOs)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On a different note: in larger mesh networks (athens wireless comes to mind) you do encounter strange effects when you go to a couple of hundred of nodes. So I would not underestimate the need for a massive test. Massive means maybe 1000 ;-)<br>
<br>
After all you can reach that number of 1000 kids quite easily.<br>
<br>
<br>
a.<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c"><br>
<br>
<br>
On Jun 8, 2008, at 5:55 AM, Kim Quirk wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Some thoughts from a QA perspective:<br>
<br>
I consider the 100 laptops that I budgeted, ordered and help install in Peabody to be the QA "collaboration testbed", which is expected to be used to recreate problems from the field and test out next release solutions. Since we had to dismantle Peabody, most of these laptops (about 70 of them) have been loaned to Poly in 1CC. Now that we have both a QA Lead and an intern, I expect we will need to refocus 20-30 laptops back to the QA testbed full time and we have signed a lease on the new test facility, which will be ready for the full 100 laptop test bed (or perhaps 200 laptops) by mid-July.<br>
<br>
Secondly, we also need to be working on the longer term solutions, such as those being investigated by Poly, Nortel, Michail, and Ricardo. If this also requires a 100 laptop test bed then we need to build one. We need to order these laptops and start making permanent homes for them. If the first step is to order 10 laptops, I will order them.<br>
<br>
Poly - What I can't tell from your progress reports is exactly what is needed for us to get to the next level. On the surface it sounds like you had to rebuild chat to make it work with cerebro. If so, does that mean all activities would have to be modified to a new API? What else is needed? How does the cerebro solution fit into the rest of the stack and the other technologies we are working on for 8.2.0 (August) and future releases?<br>
<br>
If the cerebro solution is still in research and there are a lot of issues that still need to be worked out before we can release it, then we need someone to help track all the issues and help resolve them through the stack in order to get something to release stage. Let's work with Michail on this as he probably needs to take the lead.<br>
<br>
As a first step, I will order 10 laptops for Poly to find permanent homes for throughout the MIT campus.<br>
<br>
Kim<br>
<br>
<br>
On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 12:02 PM, C. Scott Ananian <<a href="mailto:cscott@laptop.org" target="_blank">cscott@laptop.org</a>> wrote:<br>
Honestly, I'm getting very burned out over the politicking here.<br>
Ricardo, Polychronis, and the Nortel guys seem to be the ones doing<br>
the real heavy lifting here on the mesh network. When they ask for<br>
something, I think we should give it to them. Ricardo and Polychronis<br>
agree that a sparse network testbed may be useful -- in addition to,<br>
not instead of, a dense collaboration testbed -- why can't we just<br>
say, yes, do that then.<br>
<br>
Wad is right, we still need a collaboration testbed, but as Poly<br>
points out this is currently Collabora's area of responsibility.<br>
--scott<br>
<br>
--<br>
( <a href="http://cscott.net/" target="_blank">http://cscott.net/</a> )<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org" target="_blank">Devel@lists.laptop.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel" target="_blank">http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Devel@lists.laptop.org" target="_blank">Devel@lists.laptop.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel" target="_blank">http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel</a><br>
</blockquote>
<br></div></div>
---<br>
there's no place like <a href="http://127.0.0.1" target="_blank">127.0.0.1</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>