Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: > Yeah, I don't think auto* is going to be a good base anyway and Ian's > plan about setuptools made sense to me. Now, if Ian could work with Bert > to port the etoys activity over setuptools, I think that would be a good > basic test of his plan (the etoys activity looks really simple to > "package").
Cool. Ian? > That works for me. I'm going to need some C++ in the browser activity > but I can just keep it as part of sugar rather than using a separate > bundle. Sounds good. -- Ivan Krstić <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | GPG: 0x147C722D _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.laptop.org/mailman/listinfo/sugar
