From Fedora Project Wiki

Revision as of 19:30, 10 January 2009 by Kwade (talk | contribs) (all the notes I got; started about :09 late, but got all the chalkboard. There is video this can be linked with.)

XO design goals not currently satisfied by RPM

  1. Installing by "getting from a friend"
  2. Kids can change and redistribute bundles.
    1. Kid bundles are "first class" (distributed versioning implies distributed dependencies)
  3. Don't break the world at install time
  4. Localizability in the absence of a cantralized repo
  5. Novice programmers using [Pippy]

Questions

  1. Should activities be noarch?

Wrap-up

  • Short-term -- XO format not going away because of requirements not in RPM or any other package format.
  • Other problems underneath -- development standards for activity developers. (What is testing, what is release.)
  • This is the release, pull it from git, and build an installable package == something that helps XO and RPM potentially.

Notes - other, raw

  • Giving people freedoms and guidelines are not exclusive goals
  • Reference point -- Firefox add-ons. Single platform question, then it installs; highly enables community of add-on (activity) creators.
  • XO bundles are more like Java Applets than not -- from security framework, to the idea that you are grabbing and caching a webpage for playing with later.
Retrieved from "https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=RPM_vs_XO_FUDConF11_BarCamp_session_20090110&oldid=69736"