Talk:9.1.0 requirements
Comment from Gnu
Power doesn't leap out of the strategy section as something we must improve. It could go in reliability but it will require a concerted effort to get it right.
Greg's default suggestion is that the power control panel we have know should work as documented. That's a start but it should be clear by the time the requirements definition is final how much effort we spend on power and what constitutes successful implementation.
Comments from Michael on Technical Strategy section
- As explained in detail here, I have serious problems with this statement of purpose. Come talk to me and let's work out better wording. --Michael Stone 23:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Comment on Michael with regards to #* Are you more interested in changing the software to match the manual or in changing the manual to match the software? --Michael Stone 23:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments
Thanks for the input on priorities. Good points! BTW please leave you name or pseudonym for future contact.
The top priority is "Stability". I'm not sure who gets the final say but that's my position and I haven't heard any dissenters yet.
Its not the kind of priority that you can call completely done. What I want to do is set a target (including a list of bugs) and get agreement on a definition of success.
In the mean time I think we need to continue making progress on the other Goals (not using "priority" :-) too....
BTW nice use of ascii art, I like it.
Gregorio 11:54, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Comment From Rafa
I see there is a title regarding Pedagogical_Strategy have you got any words or direction about how OLPC is going to take this?-
--RafaelOrtiz
Hi Rafael,
I hope so but if I don't get something good this can be removed. Anyone who wants to take a stab at it can get us started....
Thanks,
Greg S 12:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
PS not sure where to leave this message. I'll e-mail you if you that is better in the future.
Hi greg,
thx for your answer,,mail could be better next time ;). User:RafaelOrtiz
Words of Wisdom (regarding priorities)
\\//_ Priorities (pluralized) is an oxymoron. _\\//
\\//_ Two priorities is no priorities. _\\//
At any point in time, the team should have exactly one top priority. Each team member should focus on that one top priority, unless somehow blocked. The top priority will normally only change when something is substantially finished.
What is the #1 top priority for 9.1.0 right now ?
(Who chooses the #1 top priority?)
Top Priority candidates for 9.1.0
- new datastore
- new filesystem to replace jffs2 (or make jffs2 work better?)
- system security
- performance
- reliability
- document existing stuff
- document future stuff
- new features
- fix known bugs
- software update tools
- identify, attract, or acquire development resources
- remove impediments to progress
- reduce memory footprint
- reduce work-in-progress
- take out the garbage; clean up the house; improve the work environment
Choose a top priority that has few blockers, a high probability of success, that contributes to short-term and long-term survival, that will ultimately make many customers happy, and that makes the next successor priority easier to accomplish.
- cscott: is this possible?
- cjb: yes. marco may believe xulrunner is responsible
- cscott: then that scope is much more specific of general investigation
- cjb: I know I can run wikibrowse under webkit...
- cscott: what about packaging ff2 as well as ff3? the thing is... it leaks memory, but may have a smaller initial working set.
- jg: it could be something silly like our default mem cache config was...
- mstone: that was looked into