[Sugar-devel] discussion about dropping the emulator from the sugar package...

[Simon Schampijer]

On 05/07/2013 12:44 PM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> On 7 May 2013 10:01, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Advantages of having it together is that as the sugar release changes
>> the changes are made to sugar the changes to sugar-runner are in lock
>> step so you should never get into a situation where either shouldn't
>> work together. It makes it easier from a test/QA that the releases are
>> together and you don't get into situations where you need to deal with
>> a "this version works with, doesn't work with" releases.
>>
>
> The two modules are very decoupled. I think it's  unlikely you will get
> mismatches (although it could still happen of course).
>
> In practice, unless something changes, it's much more likely that you will
> get a sugar-emulator not working with the sugar in the same tarball,
> because no one have tested it before releasing.
>
>
>>> For what it's worth I'm not completely opposed about folding sugar-runner
>>> back into sugar  (I suppose it would make packager lives a bit easier).
>> But
>>> I'm not going to do that work.
>>
>> I don't have time to maintain another package either and from a
>> packager point of view it adds quite a bit more work especially on the
>> QA side of things. I'm also still completely unaware of what
>> dependencies are needed to run it over the old one.
>
>
> The dependencies should be the same as sugar-emulator.
>
> As I said in my answer to Simon, I see sugar-runner a bit as an optional
> module. imo if yo don't have time to maintain it, it's fine to omit.

Ok, sounds good to just omit it then, for me at least.

Simon