[Sugar-devel] Hypothetical sugar-0.90 material, draft 1.

[Lucian Branescu]

On 10 June 2010 04:28, Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 2010/6/9 Luke Faraone <luke at faraone.cc>
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 06/09/2010 08:11 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote:
>> > As far as I know, Browse is still the only hulahop user on this planet,
>> > so it's not like we need to keep it around for API compatibility.
>>
>> Actually, hulahop is used by pyjamas[1], as evidenced by these bug
>> reports[2][3] spawned when sugar-hulahop was removed from Ubuntu Lucid.
>> An aside, according to upstream this is not an integral part of their
>> project, but it might be a good idea to involve them in the discussion.
>
> These days, I do my work in pyjamas - on the cloud. I have never used
> pyjamas on the desktop, but for people who do, hulahoop* was the least
> painful way to get there, and its removal sparked indignation.
>
> *OK, it's called hulahop, but this way all the code names mesh more
> surreally.

Sir, you made my day.

>
> Seriously, though: the fact that pyjamas-desktop can exist without hulahop
> doesn't make it attractive to lose it. It may not be integral, but I don't
> see anybody in the pyjamas world who would be replacing it any time soon, so
> it is essential as a practical matter.
>
> Jameson
>

For pyjamas's purposes, i'm not sure if webwrap (my abstraction layer
over hulahop and pywebkitgtk) would be enough. But if I do this right,
all Sugar apps will be able to use either hulahop or pywebkitgtk
without any further effort.