On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 01:48:19PM -0500, Wade Brainerd wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Aleksey Lim wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've coded[1] initial implementation[2] for "standalone" 0install mode,
> > w/o any support from shell. So, activity could bundle saccharin module
> > to .xo and
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 11:31:43PM +0100, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 2:00 AM, Aleksey Lim wrote:
> > I've coded[1] initial implementation[2] for "standalone" 0install mode,
> > w/o any support from shell. So, activity could bundle saccharin module
> > to .xo and maybe 0instal
On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 2:00 AM, Aleksey Lim wrote:
> I've coded[1] initial implementation[2] for "standalone" 0install mode,
> w/o any support from shell. So, activity could bundle saccharin module
> to .xo and maybe 0install pure python library as well(otherwise system
> should have already inst
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Aleksey Lim wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've coded[1] initial implementation[2] for "standalone" 0install mode,
> w/o any support from shell. So, activity could bundle saccharin module
> to .xo and maybe 0install pure python library as well(otherwise system
> should have
Hi all,
I've coded[1] initial implementation[2] for "standalone" 0install mode,
w/o any support from shell. So, activity could bundle saccharin module
to .xo and maybe 0install pure python library as well(otherwise system
should have already installed zeroinstall-injector package, it could be
any
El Thu, 15-10-2009 a las 19:18 +0200, Martin Langhoff escribió:
> Ok - that's good. I am familiar with the limitations we are hitting
> with rpm and dpkg. What I truly wonder about is things like
> 'autopackage' and klik.
>
> See also the 'see also' section in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Ins
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Martin Langhoff
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
>> Honestly? I think the most interesting feature of Zero Install is that
>> it has an active development community working to solve the same hard
>> problems that we are facing with
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> Honestly? I think the most interesting feature of Zero Install is that
> it has an active development community working to solve the same hard
> problems that we are facing with our XO bundles.
Ok - that's good. I am familiar with the lim
El Thu, 15-10-2009 a las 10:32 +0200, Martin Langhoff escribió:
> I think it's a very good idea to look into a userdir-centric packaging
> system such as z-i. There are of course a few other alternatives, and
> very well considered critiques of these systems (from OS-centric
> packagers usually ;-)
On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 11:05 AM, DancesWithCars
wrote:
> yes, what is you exec overview/
> why are you proposing to discard .xo bundling?
> or is this an option?
>
I don't think that we're discussing discarding .xo bundling. I think we're
discussing augmenting .xo bundling with 0install to br
yes, what is you exec overview/
why are you proposing to discard .xo bundling?
or is this an option?
With the XO 1.5 including a gnome desktop
and just for development purposes,
and environmental running environments
having a broader base
(read multi linux distro and even aspartamine)
and multi wi
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 6:39 AM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> Zero Install appears to have identified reasonable compromises for many
> of these trade-offs. While I'm not yet claiming that z-i would be a
(Keeping it in the Sugar side... )
I think it's a very good idea to look into a userdir-centric
On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 07:45:20 +, Aleksey Lim wrote:
> I'm personally +1024 for 0install integration(and even in 0.88 cycle),
I'll add my two bits and make that +7168, I'm working on a non-sugar XO
environment and I'd much rather it be complimentary to Sugar rather than
an either or. My system
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 12:39:59AM -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
> Dear Zero Install developers,
>
> as you may know, Sugar is a learning environment consisting of
> educational activities packaged and distributed as "bundles", which are
> some kind of glorified zip files.
>
> This design was ch
Dear Zero Install developers,
as you may know, Sugar is a learning environment consisting of
educational activities packaged and distributed as "bundles", which are
some kind of glorified zip files.
This design was chosen because we wanted to enable our learners to
participate in the creation of
15 matches
Mail list logo
