On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 00:23 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> > There's no reason to have both a filename and a dbus-like name for the
> > same thing. The former must already be unique on both distribution sites
> > and in the Activities d
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> There's no reason to have both a filename and a dbus-like name for the
> same thing. The former must already be unique on both distribution sites
> and in the Activities directory.
I claim we should be using the dbus-like name for "both
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 19:57 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> > A good surrogate could be that no two activities with the same name can
> > be uploaded to ASLO.
>
> Translated name? English name? No Spanish name may conflict with a
> Portuguese or English name? Seems a bit strange to me.
Files
On 27.07.2010, at 18:57, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 18:21 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
>
>> This is a nicely decentralized mechanism for choosing identifiers
>> which are guaranteed by construction never to conflict.
>
> It is indeed a simple and nice scheme, but why is s
On 27 July 2010 23:57, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 18:21 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
>
>> This is a nicely decentralized mechanism for choosing identifiers
>> which are guaranteed by construction never to conflict.
>
> It is indeed a simple and nice scheme, but why is such u
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 18:21 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
>
> > This is a nicely decentralized mechanism for choosing identifiers
> > which are guaranteed by construction never to conflict.
>
> It is indeed a simple and nice scheme, but
On Tue, 2010-07-27 at 18:21 -0400, C. Scott Ananian wrote:
> This is a nicely decentralized mechanism for choosing identifiers
> which are guaranteed by construction never to conflict.
It is indeed a simple and nice scheme, but why is such uniqueness a
desiderable feature when developers can--and
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 5:14 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> The bundle base name (e.g Record) should be unique by itself, because
> you can't have two directories named "Record.activity" in your
> activities directory.
This is, IMO, a bug. The directory should really be named after the bundle id.
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 17:56 +0100, Lucian Branescu wrote:
> If it doesn't bother you that vpri is in the bundle name and VPRI
> themselves don't have a problem with it, I don't think you should
> bother changing it. For example many activities are org.laptop.*, even
> though they're now developed u
On 22 July 2010 17:49, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> On 22.07.2010, at 12:18, Lucian Branescu wrote:
>
>> I was thinking of changing
>> the bundle_id of Browse-webkit from 'org.laptop.WebActivity' to
>> 'org.sugarlabs.WebActivity', to allow both Browse to be installed and
>> working at the same time.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> On 22.07.2010, at 12:18, Lucian Branescu wrote:
>
>> I was thinking of changing
>> the bundle_id of Browse-webkit from 'org.laptop.WebActivity' to
>> 'org.sugarlabs.WebActivity', to allow both Browse to be installed and
>> working at the
On 22.07.2010, at 12:18, Lucian Branescu wrote:
> I was thinking of changing
> the bundle_id of Browse-webkit from 'org.laptop.WebActivity' to
> 'org.sugarlabs.WebActivity', to allow both Browse to be installed and
> working at the same time. However, this might confuse users yet again,
> since th
12 matches
Mail list logo
