On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:31 PM, Nick McCloud <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 21 Apr 2015, at 11:49, Oliver Grawert <[email protected]> wrote: >> Am Dienstag, den 21.04.2015, 11:24 +0100 schrieb Nick McCloud: >>> My understanding of the project is that having a full desktop environment >>> is not a use case it is designed. If you could get a snap together that had >>> a desktop environment in it, it would be mighty similar to an LTS release >>> with additional controls on the update mechanism. >> pretty much the exact opposite is the case, snappy is the future of >> Ubuntu everywhere (even on the desktop) ... if we say Convergence we >> actually mean that you run *exactly* the same OS on *all* devices. >> Convergence isn't just "uuh, my app adapts to a different form >> factor" ;) > > Fair enough but I really didn’t get that from the initial scan of the > marketing blurb - I’ll re-read it! > > And on the topic of web pages - per my email from yesterday, how might I best > relay corrections to the Getting started, Using snappy and Build snaps pages?
To be fair, I don't think there is a universal truth on how one would realize a desktop stack using ubuntu core + frameworks. I can see how making one big framework could make sense for some desktop type stacks, while for others a more fine grained break down could make sense. What matters is that frameworks are not meant to replace fine grained deb packages. How something like a desktop stack is best split up is something that would need to be architected, prototyped and iterated on. On size of framework, guideline is: if it makes sense to do something from architecture pov, dont worry about size. - Alexander > > Nick > > > -- > snappy-devel mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snappy-devel -- snappy-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snappy-devel
