On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Simon Schampijer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: >> >> 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 > > Actually I want to add to this activities discussion that even that we do > not > have the activities installed by default the dependencies are. > xulrunner/hulahop for browse, libabiword for write... > > What is the plan for those? I know that we do not have dependency handling > at > the moment but maybe we would have to then.
We should list the dependencies on the Roadmap page. I'm going to do so when we made a call about which activities to include next week. Marco _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
