Sugar demo 3: Difference between revisions

From OLPC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
== TODO ==
== TODO ==


* Turn the presence service in a DBUS service, to simplify the code and decrease network usage.
...
* Fix the misuse of zeroconf service types.
* Define an API that makes straight forward the most common case: activity specific service browing.
* It should not be necessary to write a Shell per each activity to manage multiple activities in the same process.
* Abstract activity construction.
* Move the one-to-one chat listener inside the shell
* Get rid of xembed and use matchbox for window management (on the OLPC)
* Improve multi cast reliability. The use case is out of school small groups of kids.
* Start defining contributors development tools (build, coding, testing)


See [[Sugar architecture review 1]] and [[Sugar design review 3]] for an higher level introduction to the demo goals.
See [[Sugar architecture review 1]] and [[Sugar design review 3]] for an higher level introduction to the demo goals.

Revision as of 02:53, 30 June 2006

The target date for completion is 21 July 2006.

TODO

  • Turn the presence service in a DBUS service, to simplify the code and decrease network usage.
  • Fix the misuse of zeroconf service types.
  • Define an API that makes straight forward the most common case: activity specific service browing.
  • It should not be necessary to write a Shell per each activity to manage multiple activities in the same process.
  • Abstract activity construction.
  • Move the one-to-one chat listener inside the shell
  • Get rid of xembed and use matchbox for window management (on the OLPC)
  • Improve multi cast reliability. The use case is out of school small groups of kids.
  • Start defining contributors development tools (build, coding, testing)

See Sugar architecture review 1 and Sugar design review 3 for an higher level introduction to the demo goals.