[sugar] Squeak / Etoys RPMs
Marco Pesenti Gritti
Mon Oct 9 05:38:38 EDT 2006
Ivan Krsti? wrote:
> Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
>> * How do we pack executable code and resources in an activity bundle?
>> distutils, setuptools, auto*, something else? I don't think we want to
>> force people to use *one* build system but there should be at least a
>> suggested/documented one.
> Right. So, it sounds like all of these systems will need to get extended
> to support our bundle format; let's pick one to begin with, and do the
> rest later (and the community might contribute them). I'd trust Ian's
> judgment on picking an initial build system to bootstrap.
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
>> * I think Dan wrote the bundles spec to support also non-python
>> activities. For unmanaged languages, C/C++ for example, how do we ensure
>> that executables will work on the target machines (for example use a
>> compatible toolchain)?
> I feel strongly that we should not address this until after B-Test, both
> because we really don't have the engineering resources to spend on
> making sure this behaves properly, and because there are huge security
> implications at play here, so we should wait until the security specs
> are public before figuring out how exactly to tackle this problem. Is
> that okay with you?
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.
More information about the Sugar-devel