[Sugar-devel] .rpms vs .xos for Activity packaging

[Aleksey Lim]

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:44:52AM -0500, luke at faraone.cc wrote:
> On 1/12/09, Aleksey Lim <alsroot at member.fsf.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 10:43:01PM -0500, luke at faraone.cc wrote:
> >> On 1/11/09, Aleksey Lim <alsroot at member.fsf.org> wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > Some thought after reading
> >> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Sugar_on_Fedora:_RPMs_or_.xos%3F
> >> >
> >> > Maybe instead of choosing one format for activities just add to
> >> > activity.info dependency in common/distro-unbinded notation:
> >> >
> >> > - Activity's author package code in .xo format with dependency string
> >> > like
> >> >   'Requires = pygtk' in activity.info
> >> > - user downloads .xo and pass it to distro-specific installer;
> >> >   installer translates dependency from distro-unbinded notation to
> >> > native
> >> >   package name and pass it to package manager;
> >> >   and install activity itself.
> >>
> >> Something to consider: different distros will have different package
> >> naming conventions and versioning. We might want to encorage using the
> >> fedora dep conventions and look into how the "alien" package handles
> >> this.
> >
> > You missed my main purpose: activity author should not known about variety
> > of
> > GNU/Linux distros, his behaviour should be very straightforward - after
> > including 'import pygame' to .py, please include 'Requires = pygame' to
> > activity.info. The whole dependencies mess in proper distro should be work
> > out
> > by distro-specific installer
> 
> That'd be a huge amount of work unless we had some standard for naming.
yup, I meant standard naming scheme

> We could use the already-existing python egg package format... which
> already has dep handling and is cross platform. Was that already
> considered?
good question (only one but - non-python activities)

-- 
Aleksey