I am a bit confused. Having checked ouf "kernel" (I agree it could use a better
name), todays update brings with it a "users" directory, and the PartsBin.
Not what I expect for a "kernel".
The naming convention I have used in the past is.
"kernel" for the absolute minimal common core functionality
- In a system like lively-kernel it doesn't have to work
- in a squeak like system, it should be able to run a bootstrap to load
core packages, i.e. no UI.
"core" loadable libraries that provide standard functionality on top of
"kernel".
"packages" loadable modules to extend base.
"kernel, core and packages" are separate code repositories, where as "base and
stable" are assemblies of code from the above repositories.
"release" whatever the developers have thrown at me (in the case of squeak/cuis)
"base" an empty working starting point for building stuff, (is a conceptual or
virtual release, i.e. "stable" with unloadable packages taken out.
- effectively the release of "kernel" + "core"
"stable" - a release "base" + default "packages" for end users to work with.
- "stable" = "kernel" + "core" + "packages" x N
- If "packages" are "unloadable" or "load on demand", then a larger
"stable" release gives users more to play with, but does not limit flexibility
at all.
To support forking, in launchpad the same naming convention can be used for
different products..
lively/kernel
lively/core
lively/base
lively/stable
lively/packages
lively/unstable
So my own product would be
deadly/stable etc.
Keith
_______________________________________________
lively-kernel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel
