On Wed, 04 Aug 2010 20:05:06 +0100, pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu 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
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
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu 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
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 this
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 might decide to
On 8 Aug 2010, at 15:18, Jon Nettleton jon.nettle...@gmail.com 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
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
bmsch...@fas.harvard.edu 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
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:50 PM, John Gilmore g...@toad.com wrote:
I think you are missing an important requirement: installation without
elevated permissions.
Enhancing deb or rpm to be able to do this would be a win all around.
A nonroot install would install under one's home directory, if
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 years
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-rotting for the
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:16 AM, Aleksey Lim alsr...@member.fsf.org 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
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 activity bundles could be:
1) Support multiple CPU architectures
2) Support
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) Centralized build cluster (submit one source package, get multiple
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 1:50 PM, John Gilmore g...@toad.com wrote:
I think you are missing an important requirement: installation without
elevated permissions.
Enhancing deb or rpm to be able to do this would be a win all around.
Yes, it's been in the To Do list for dpkg and rpm for as long as
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 activity
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.
Rainbow has been bit-rotting for the past 2 years and nobody
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 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 to ship
17 matches
Mail list logo
