[Sugar-devel] The ARM is near
pbrobinson at gmail.com
Fri Aug 28 06:51:19 EDT 2009
>>> As a developer, dropping .xo support would take a lot of work from my
>>> shoulders, but I suspect our users would kill us...
>> I suspect users will kill you as well when activities don't work on
>> machine X but they do on Y....... your damned if you do, damned if you
>> don't. Either way there's going to be pain, whether its the in the
>> short or the long term.
> Yeah, I guess Jonas' suggestion of promoting platform independent
> bundles as "first class" addresses this concern.
> I personally don't think we are going to be able to outdo rpms nor
> debs so the less binary code we have the better.
> That said, our users are free to do whatever they want and Sugar will
> be deployed in wildly different scenarios. So I think that leaving
> some extra flexibility is wise because if we try to anticipate all the
> ways in which Sugar will be used, we'll fail.
That's the advantage of open source - people can do what ever they
like. I think from the sugar perspective there needs to be some
standard defined and recommendation made +to make supporting it easier
rather than just sitting on the fence. Deployments or people of course
are then free to ignore those recommendations and package half a
binary distribution up in their .xo if they so choose. At the moment
its not so much of an issue but moving forward I think that if
something isn't well defined now we're going to end up with a massive
support burden going forward with users coming to mailing lists
complaining because activities don't work and that sugar is bad
because nothing works.
More information about the Sugar-devel