[Sugar-devel] Name for Sugar Packages

Gary Martin garycmartin at googlemail.com
Sat Jul 31 20:00:04 EDT 2010

On 31 Jul 2010, at 23:24, 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)

Not sure I grasp the above.

> 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".

But if it's a name game, I can't avoid suggesting Sugar "cube" ;)


> -- 
> Aleksey
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

More information about the Sugar-devel mailing list