Difference between revisions of "Features/Host Version"
ChristophD (talk | contribs) |
ChristophD (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
== Detailed Description == | == Detailed Description == | ||
| − | With 0.86 being on the horizont, 0.84 being used on SoaS, 0.82 being widely used among the G1G1 community and some deployments and many deployment still using pre-0.82 software I think the issue of activity compatibility deserves some serious attention. Otherwise this has the potential to create _a lot of_ confusion and frustration further down the road. | + | With 0.86 being on the horizont, 0.84 being used on SoaS, 0.82 being widely used among the G1G1 community and some deployments and many deployment still using pre-0.82 software I think the issue of activity compatibility deserves some serious attention. Otherwise this has the potential to create _a lot of_ confusion and frustration further down the road (especially with things like the XO-1.5 that supports 3D acceleration on the horizont). |
Not sure what the original plans wrt the technical implemention of this feature were but I would assume the harder part of solving this problem is spreading the word among activity developers to update their .xo bundles accordingly. | Not sure what the original plans wrt the technical implemention of this feature were but I would assume the harder part of solving this problem is spreading the word among activity developers to update their .xo bundles accordingly. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
== Benefit to Sugar == | == Benefit to Sugar == | ||
| − | + | Avoids user confusion as to why some activities might potentially not work on the currently installed OS. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
== Scope == | == Scope == | ||
Revision as of 03:54, 21 July 2009
Summary
Using "hosts" variable in the activity.info files to determine whether an activity runs on the specific Sugar installation.
Owner
- Name: Christoph Derndorfer
- Email: christoph AT olpcnews DOT com
Current status
- Targeted release: 0.86
- Last updated: 2009-07-21
- Percentage of completion: 0%
Detailed Description
With 0.86 being on the horizont, 0.84 being used on SoaS, 0.82 being widely used among the G1G1 community and some deployments and many deployment still using pre-0.82 software I think the issue of activity compatibility deserves some serious attention. Otherwise this has the potential to create _a lot of_ confusion and frustration further down the road (especially with things like the XO-1.5 that supports 3D acceleration on the horizont).
Not sure what the original plans wrt the technical implemention of this feature were but I would assume the harder part of solving this problem is spreading the word among activity developers to update their .xo bundles accordingly.
Someone, preferably the activity authors themselves, would need to check activities against the various Sugar versions which are in use and document their findings. This however could also be a nice entry-level task for people who want to start contributing to Sugar.
Benefit to Sugar
Avoids user confusion as to why some activities might potentially not work on the currently installed OS.
Scope
TBD
How To Test
TBD
User Experience
Depends on the implementation but one way could be to fail gracefully by showing a warning when an activity that doesn't work on the specific Sugar version is downloaded/run. The warning message could also include information or a link to information on how to update the XO to the latest version.
Dependencies
TBD
Contingency Plan
None yet
Documentation
None yet
Release Notes
TBD
Comments and Discussion
You can add categories to tie features back to real deployments/schools requesting them, for example [[Category:Features requested by School Xyz]]