[Sugar-devel] The ARM is near

[Lucian Branescu]

This is a bit of a stretch, but would it be possible to distribute
GIMPLE or LLVM IR and finish the compilation on installation?
Installing would take longer, but it should work on any architecture
the code can compile to.

2009/8/29 Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu at sugarlabs.org>:
> 2009/8/29 Philippe Clérié <philippe at gcal.net>:
>> Well, I wasn't attempting to solve anything. I thought I was just
>> brainstorming.
>>
>> These past few weeks there have been a lot of discussions about
>> processes. Meanwhile, I am heading into the classroom with a
>> somewhat unstable and unfinished platform not to mention very little
>> guidance as to exactly how to make this thing work. I'll probably
>> let the kids take the lead.
>>
>> Calling Sugar a distribution might not solve anything (certainly not
>> my own problems), but it might help us focus on the practical matter
>> of deciding how to put out that distibution instead of arguing about
>> how to decide what we're about to do.
>
> Ok, so the idea is to focus our resources on the distribution level?
> I'm not very fond of that because:
>
> - we aren't a company that has resources and puts them wherever its
> management says so. Work is done by volunteers and they work on
> whatever they fancy. I think that having less focus is useful here
> because brings more interested people onboard that we otherwise
> wouldn't have.
>
> - polishing a distribution is _lots_ of work. Canonical, Novell,
> Redhat, etc. are putting lots of resources into there. I think that a
> small set of people can take one of those distros and make it work
> better for a specific use case, but we aren't going to outrun the big
> players in a generic, polished distro.
>
> - other organizations are already taking Sugar and distro bits and
> putting them together for their specific use cases. Maybe no one is
> doing that yet for your use cases, but I don't think it means that we
> need to drop whatever we are doing and do that instead. If we have
> opportunities open and advertise them properly, we may get people to
> do the work.
>
> - if we abandon upstream development, what point is in packaging it?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tomeu
>
>> --
>>
>>
>> Philippe
>>
>> ------
>>
>>> So is the only problem what we are calling Sugar today? If we
>>> rename SoaS to Sugar and Sugar to Sucrose, how we would be
>>> solving anything?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Tomeu
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>
>
>
> --
> «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar.
> What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David
> Farning
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>