[Microbit-Python] MicroPython on micro:bit TODO list

[Howard Baker-IF&L]

Thanks Joe.

From: Microbit [mailto:microbit-bounces+howard.baker=bbc.co.uk at python.org] On Behalf Of Finney, Joe
Sent: 15 July 2015 12:28
To: For Pythonic MicroBit related disucssions
Subject: Re: [Microbit-Python] MicroPython on micro:bit TODO list

Let’s separate action from politics as much as possible here. We can do (1) NOW, so let’s do that and drive the rest as we go.

So here’s the call to arms to anyone who is already under NDA and wants access to the micro:bit runtime (DAL) library :


-          Go to https://developer.mbed.org/

-          Create an account.

-          E-mail me with your name and mbed username.

-          I’ll arrange for access (I don’t hold the keys to the group at the mo).

Joe

From: Microbit [mailto:microbit-bounces+j.finney=lancaster.ac.uk at python.org] On Behalf Of Michael
Sent: 15 July 2015 11:39
To: For Pythonic MicroBit related disucssions
Subject: Re: [Microbit-Python] MicroPython on micro:bit TODO list

Hi Nick,

On 15 July 2015 at 10:22, Nicholas H.Tollervey <ntoll at ntoll.org<mailto:ntoll at ntoll.org>> wrote:
On 15/07/15 10:19, Finney, Joe wrote:
> I'm afraid I can't do that unilaterally as it's written into our
> contract... If we wanted to do this, it would need signoff from BBC
> (and maybe others).
>

Hi Joe,

That's exactly what Howard was discussing on Monday. What steps would
the BBC need to execute in order for resources to be open-sourced
sometime in August.


Probably the key one is an explicit statement of absolute need with the consequence of not happening being dire.


In my experience, **more** people stating this often results in a quicker action. The BBC is an incredibly risk averse organisation generally speaking, which means decisions rarely reside in a single individual - though are often *driven* by a one or more people.


Unpicking this, I would suggest there are three steps possible steps:

1) Sharing of the current runtime/DAL (pretty much immediately :-) ) since without this, this group cannot move forward. The preference here IMO should be:
    - get the current working team added to the permissions list for [the mbed mercurial repo]

Since changes can and do happen, and tracking them is necessary and vital.


2) Look to release the *micro-python* version of the runtime/DAL ASAP - **in the early august time frame** noted above.
ie everything necessary to run build and run micro-python for the micro-bit. The purpose of this would be community engagement. I think this is necessary to the creation of a *successful* micropython runtime for the micro:bit.


3) Look to release the main runtime/DAL **in the august time frame**. This would IMO be extremely useful since it would help keep "2") on track, otherwise it requires those with access to 1) to moderate and gatekeep changes closer - which is an overhead.


My impression - is that 3) could be *tricky* - because the plan for release as open source anyway is that it will be through a non-profit company - and I suspect that it would be disruptive for that. Or at least licensing under the name micro:bit will be. (ala the way the arduino name is, but not the hardware/software - which is open)


My impression that despite overlap on some technical levels... that 2) would be easier to get internal BBC agreement for on the timescale that you need.


My impression is that 1) is just a no-brainer - of the level of "why are you asking for me to say "no" " :-)


As I say though, the thing which will be make Howard's life easier will be simple answers to this;

For each of the 3 things, how important is it to happen:

  - It can't work otherwise
  - Necessary and vital,
  - Necessary
  - Extremely useful.

And the consequence of it not happening.

I'd say:

1) is "It can't work otherwise" - it can't be delivered without this
2) is "Necessary" (possibly "Necessary and vital") - quality will suffer without this
3) is "Extremely useful." - it could cause 2) to drift badly from 1) without this, resulting problems in schools

The more people who state their position, the better, the point being to help Howard - since he can ask "do we want the latter option to occur", to which you'd hope people would say "no". :-)

It's worth noting that everyone I've spoken to in the BBC has been up for release (I state this because it's very unusual for there to be such quick universal agreement). However, often the most common timeline I've heard has been November, so this would be a change that needs justification. To those on this list, I suspect the reasons are obvious.

It will have more weight from others on this list though :-)

Regards,


Michael





----------------------------

http://www.bbc.co.uk
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.

---------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.python.org/mailman/private/microbit/attachments/20150720/fe03b5cb/attachment-0001.html>