On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Martin Dengler <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 12:22:56PM -0400, Mel Chua wrote: >> And yep. I think that keeping track of other Sugar liveUSB >> implementations is going to help this, because that way we can keep >> track of naming. ("Sugar liveUSB implementations" is a much better >> term than "SoaS spins," which was the term I was using because I >> couldn't think of any others.) > > Perhaps "Sugar live images" would be better? They're not just for USB > devices. > > Actually, the only distinguishing factor I can see (besides being > talked about far more than they're tested ;)) is that they were > originally designed to run from read-only media but now cannot.
I see two other possible common factors: 1. They are designed to auto discover/configure their hardware/network access at every boot. 2. They are designed to run from what is usually thought of as removable media (this is either a result of or the reason for #1) Hmm. Are they "transportable Sugar installations"? This doesn't mean they always will be moved from place to place, but a design requirement is that they can be. Bill Bogstad _______________________________________________ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
