[IAEP] Common Sugar distribution package contents.

[Bert Freudenberg]

On 03.12.2008, at 18:15, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 08:36:42AM -0800, C.W. Holeman II wrote:
>> http://sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Application_Stack:
>>
>>   *  Library Collections (e.g., for the Browse Activity)
>>   * Sugar Activities (Browse, Read, Write, Record Turtle Art)
>>   * Sugar
>>   * Operating System (Linux, MacOSX, MSWindows)
>>   * Hardware Platform ( XO-1,   EEE PC, Classmate,  XO-2)
>>
>> Libraries are distributed in collections.
>> Activities are distributed in bundles.
>> Sugar is distributed in various kinds of packaging.
>>
>> The library collections and activity bundle formats for Sugar are
>> in a format that is common across all OS/Hardware platforms.
>> Sugar is distributed in formats that depend upon the
>> OS/Hardware platform.
>>
>> The contents of activity bundle like Turtle Art or Browse is the same
>> across all OS/Hardware platforms.
>>
>> The performance of Sugar on various OS/Hardware platforms varies.  
>> This
>> should only be for issues that are dependent upon the underlying
>> hardware and OS. It should not be the case for Sugar, Activities and
>> libraries. There should be a common or core set of Activities and
>> Library Collections that are in every Sugar distribution regardless  
>> of
>> the kind of packaging the OS uses.
>>
>> There should be documentation on what the common or core Sugar must
>> always contain. The packagers need this information. There may be
>> additional optional packages also defined that are intended to work  
>> on
>> all systems.
>>
>> This is needed to promote Sugar as a friendly environment for  
>> outsiders
>> to become insiders.
>
> Suggestion: Encourage, but do not mandate, distributions to follow the
> Glucose/Fructose grouping of packages as documented at
> http://sugarlabs.org/go/DevelopmentTeam/Source_Code and ecourage (not
> mandate) releasing one of the following (prioritized - first is best):
>
>   1) All branches (0.81, 0.82 and 0.83 currently)
>   2) All stable branches (0.82 currently)
>   3) Only latest stable branch (0.82 currently)
>
>
> This is releated to the recent discussion on whether Sugarlabs would
> rather that Debian-edu) rip out and avoid Sugar from its next release
> than release with software not matching latest stable branch.
>
> Must all parts of Glucose/Fructose be included in a distribution?
>
> Must all parts of Glucose/Fructose be installed together?
>
> Must all parts of Glucose/Fructose be no older than official release?
>
> Must all parts of Glucose/Fructose be no newer than official release?
>
>
> What if a distribution does not obey your wish? Do you want to protect
> your name like Mozilla does (leading to Debian renaming its web  
> browser
> to "Iceweasel" to be allowed to independently apply security patches)?
> Or do you perhaps want to only protect your own official binary  
> releases
> like Squeak?


s/Squeak/Scratch/

- Bert -