[Sugar-devel] Name for Sugar Packages

[Frederick Grose]

On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Aleksey Lim <alsroot at member.fsf.org> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Just wondering, how to name Sugar Packages.
>
> The reasons to not reuse "package" name - it is not regular
> (GNU/Linux distributions) packages, because:
>
>  * primal deploying model is decentralized (via 0install) not centralized
>    which is the core point of regular distros
>  * sugar "packages" still could be represented as regular packages to
>    support centralized sugar distributions but in that case it will
>    look like tunneling, e.g., ssh tunnels via http
>  * in most cases, "packages" will contain results of doer experiments,
>    e.g., not fully tested/QAed/etc stuff like packages in regular
>    distributions (at least in stable distro releases)
>  * in most cases, "package" maintainers will be their developers
>    because there is no need in any "packaging" work except supporting
>    an analog of activity.info file (for activities)
>
> The reasons to not reuse "activity" name:
>
>  * "packages" might contain not only activities but libraries, other
>    (not)well distro packaged dependencies, .xol content or sugar itself
>  * it is about deploying content not about its quality
>
> The reasons to not reuse "bundle" name:
>
>  * distribution will happen not only (or, usually, not at all) via bundles
>    (e.g. .xo bundles)
>
> And the last but not least :) reason, it would be really cool to have
> special
> name for sugar packages, e.g, Ruby has "gems", Python has "eggs".
>
> --
> Aleksey


Sugar "cubes" come to mind.  The are prepared, bite-size or cup-size
packages of compressed sugar grains.

         --Fred
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20100731/938b6bd3/attachment.htm