Michael, when several weeks ago you showed me in #sugar your patches to Sugar and explained the new rainbow concept, I told you that it seemed a good idea and that the patches looked pretty good.
As you said Rainbow wasn't ready for 0.84, I told you that we would talk again when work on 0.86 starts. Which it hasn't yet, afaik. So I don't think you should feel sad because of our schedule. All projects need one and it's good to try stick to it. I will repeat that I think Rainbow can be a very important part of Sugar and that we should see how integration should happen, but I'm afraid I cannot directly help you with coding, etc because as you know I'm very tied with 0.84 right now. Hope it clarifies, Tomeu On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 17:24, Michael Stone <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 01:47:01AM -0500, Mikus Grinbergs wrote: >>[Also, I'm hearing whispers of 'no Rainbow' after Joyride.] > > Mikus, > > In my view, it's up to the SugarLabs folks to use Rainbow or to drop it. I > have > tried to clear the way for them to use it on all the platforms they care about > by simplifying it, by making it more generically useful, by writing some basic > .deb and .rpm packaging in order to ease testing, and by writing Sugar patches > which cause Sugar to use it. Unfortunately, in the two months since I > announced this work: > > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2008-December/010528.html > > and since I spoke about it at Fudcon Boston in January, I have received no > feedback more serious than a (kind) thank-you note from Walter, let alone > testing, bug reports, or patches. As you might imagine, this overwhelming > response leaves me more than a little bit discouraged. > > Now, it could certainly be the case that there's more work that I need to do > in > the form of documenting, testing, or pushing my recent rainbows before people > will be excited about trying them out and, if that's the case, someone should > tell me. Since no one has done so to date, despite repeated overtures, I've > mostly come to believe that no one cares. > > Do you know differently? > > Michael > > P.S. - I find this state of affairs particularly sad, since I think there's an > /increasing/ amount of awesomeness that Rainbow can provide, e.g., bringing > all > the recent hard work the kernel folks have been putting in on network > containerization and memory-resource cgroups "to the masses". > _______________________________________________ > Devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
