On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 4:30 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -----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.
That's a distribution choice. Fedora doesn't install epiphany by default. > 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'm thinking and talking about upstream development, schedule and sources, not about builds. But yeah, leaving that aside I don't think we disagree. Marco _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
