On Sun, Aug 01, 2010 at 04:07:15PM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 00:24, Aleksey Lim <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Just wondering, how to name Sugar Packages. > > What are you meaning by "Sugar Packages"? Is there a wiki page or > something I have missed?
I'm collecting info on [1] but it is still in preliminary stage... I'm experimenting with local OBS[2] instance, after getting some useful results it will be available on refinery.sl.o for trying. After that, I'm planing to share my vision in more formal form with requesting new SL Team - Refinery Team. [1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Activity_Team/Zero_Sugar [2] https://build.opensuse.org/ > > The reasons to not reuse "package" name - it is not regular > > (GNU/Linux distributions) packages, because: > > > > * primal deploying model is decentralized (via 0install) not centralized > > which is the core point of regular distros > > * sugar "packages" still could be represented as regular packages to > > support centralized sugar distributions but in that case it will > > look like tunneling, e.g., ssh tunnels via http > > * in most cases, "packages" will contain results of doer experiments, > > e.g., not fully tested/QAed/etc stuff like packages in regular > > distributions (at least in stable distro releases) > > * in most cases, "package" maintainers will be their developers > > because there is no need in any "packaging" work except supporting > > an analog of activity.info file (for activities) > > > > The reasons to not reuse "activity" name: > > > > * "packages" might contain not only activities but libraries, other > > (not)well distro packaged dependencies, .xol content or sugar itself > > * it is about deploying content not about its quality > > > > The reasons to not reuse "bundle" name: > > > > * distribution will happen not only (or, usually, not at all) via bundles > > (e.g. .xo bundles) > > > > And the last but not least :) reason, it would be really cool to have > > special > > name for sugar packages, e.g, Ruby has "gems", Python has "eggs". > > Just wanted to mention that I have heard several times of the > difficulty that newcomers have with these names inspired in sugar > puns. > > For us that have been thinking about Sugar every day for several years > now it may seem convenient (and fun) to have very distinctive names > but for the rest we are making it more difficult to think of Sugar. > > I don't think we really need to be so afraid of using names that are > already being used in other contexts and that we can trust users to be > ready to discover any Sugar specificities. Just consider how these > alternatives sound to someone who is just starting to discover what > Sugar is: > > Glucose -> core modules > Fructose -> core or demonstration activities > ASLO -> activities directory > IAEP -> sugar-general, sugar-discussion, ... > etc. Well, it depends on how someone is seeing Sugar, for me, it is a Game (nobody invented a method to educate better then playing). "Special" sugar names is a part of this game. -- Aleksey _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
