On 8 Aug 2010, at 15:18, Jon Nettleton wrote:
>>
>> But the one of core ideas to not use only regular packaging systems
>> (via PackageKit or directly) is having this, natural and desired,
>> scenario for sugar ecosystem:
>>
>> * there is an activity,
>> * several users might decide to experime
On Sun, Aug 08, 2010 at 07:18:51AM -0700, Jon Nettleton wrote:
> >
> > But the one of core ideas to not use only regular packaging systems
> > (via PackageKit or directly) is having this, natural and desired,
> > scenario for sugar ecosystem:
> >
> > * there is an activity,
> > * several users migh
>
> But the one of core ideas to not use only regular packaging systems
> (via PackageKit or directly) is having this, natural and desired,
> scenario for sugar ecosystem:
>
> * there is an activity,
> * several users might decide to experiment w/ this activity
> (i.e. change its code) and share t
On Wed, Aug 04, 2010 at 08:05:06PM +0100, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
> wrote:
> > On 07/06/2010 11:51 AM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> >> Ok, I think the requirements for activity bundles could be:
> >>
> >> 1) Support multiple CPU architectures
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
wrote:
> On 07/06/2010 11:51 AM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
>> Ok, I think the requirements for activity bundles could be:
>>
>> 1) Support multiple CPU architectures
>>
>> 2) Support multiple distros (and different versions of same distro)
>>
>> 3
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:16 AM, Aleksey Lim wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 01:18:04AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
>> Bernie wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 12:02 -0400, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
>> >> I think you are missing an important requirement: installation without
>> >> elevated permiss
Aleksey wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 01:18:04AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
>> Bernie wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 12:02 -0400, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
>> >> I think you are missing an important requirement: installation without
>> >> elevated permissions.
>> >
>> > Rainbow has been bit-
On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 01:18:04AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> Bernie wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 12:02 -0400, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
> >> I think you are missing an important requirement: installation without
> >> elevated permissions.
> >
> > Rainbow has been bit-rotting for the past 2
Bernie wrote:
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 12:02 -0400, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
>> I think you are missing an important requirement: installation without
>> elevated permissions.
>
> XO and SoaS distributions are configured for sudo with no password.
Yes. However, Uruguay does not maintain this confi
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 05:59:04PM -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:56 +, 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
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 19:56 +, 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
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 11:51:00AM -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-07-05 at 16:20 +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>
> > Sorry about the confusion, these questions were about the move from xo
> > bundles to packages :(
>
> Ah! Communication FAIL! :)
>
> Ok, I think the requirements for a
12 matches
Mail list logo
