On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:56 +0000, Aleksey Lim wrote: > Just to mention how it could look like on high level > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activity_Team/Zero_Sugar#How_it_works_at_a_glance
Will it also remove the need to ship "fat bundles", as we do now? I mean, will it produce separate packages for each architecture/os or just one large package with many binaries in it? I tend to prefer the first way, like rpm and deb do. > - move all packaging related stuff from current glucose to some kind > of packaging core with using 0install as an unified packaging > "engine", such core could be e.g. a dbus service (but could be a > library as well) e.g. for now, shell does things like: decides what > activities to use, from /usr or from ~/Activities, "plain versions > vs. dotted versions" (sounds a bit amusing). All these tasks will be > handled within new packaging core Wouldn't PackageKit be a perfect match for this? > So, Zero Sugar will be useful already in two weeks e.g. it should be possible > to attach > Sugar:Platform:Factory repo from obs to have development sucrose on > major rpm/deb distros > (http://wiki.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_supported_build_targets) > or install sugarized GC (in form of application or activity) from native > packages. It's an amazing piece of work, Aleksey!! Considering that you're tackling on the hardest problem in the Sugar universe, I'm very impressed by the progress you've made in such a short amount of time. -- // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/ \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/ _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
