On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Bernie Innocenti <ber...@codewiz.org> 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 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_Install >> - What pitfalls will our individual end users and deployment teams >> face with it? > > I'm not sure how to answer this question, yet. A while ago there was some serious discussion of the issues with these 'non-OS' pkg managers. Here is "a" tip of the iceberg - http://www.licquia.org/archives/2006/03/11/autopackage-goes-insane/ The discussion was heated, and sprawled across blogs. Good points were made. Before taking on something like z-i... it'd be worth understanding the good, bad and ugly and how it applies to us... > Getting the Zero Install folks involved may bring in fresh expertise They'll know about z-i, not about the needs of Sugar or its users... hence the perspective I am mentioning. m -- martin.langh...@gmail.com mar...@laptop.org -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel