-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: | Blessing a browser is not going to remove competition. | | In practice, GNOME blesses a browser and despite most of the | distributor/users are using another one, with no interoperability | issues.
This is the key example: Gnome has an official browser (Epiphany) and an official mail client (Evolution). I don't know anybody who uses either on their own computers. Yet most still have both installed. This is stupid and wasteful. In truth, I think we are in agreement. As I said before, we should maintain two builds: sugar-base and sugar-demo. sugar-base is essentially a virtual machine for Activities. It does not come with any activities; it is just the empty shell. sugar-demo is an example build, containing a complete set of activities to show what we imagine a typical sugar installation to look like. Both of these builds should be built whenever there is a change, like joyride. Most developers will run sugar-demo. Most users will run custom builds created by their deployments. Deployments will create custom builds by starting with a release version of the sugar-base build and using a customization system to add Activities. The resulting custom build may be similar to sugar-demo, but need not contain all the activities in sugar-demo. I think our problem is just naming. Which of these things is "Sugar"? We should name these components separately, so that we know what we're talking about. - --Ben -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIKvdvUJT6e6HFtqQRAvhfAJ4pxYC1egYaerryeVlBZkwyRAdJnQCgnA8V yQ6WwmaYuAOkbvRI23qTutQ= =49C2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
