I think maintaining two parallel versions of the code in two languages would be a huge waste of effort for me, but if someone else wants to they are of course welcome to.
I have neither time nor inclination to port it merely to work around the historical accident of Java not having been Open Source at the time Sugar was initially developed. Also, I think the UI of this program is actually more friendly to very young children by *not* being more Sugarized — there's no confusing Frame when they (inevitably) move the pointer to the edges of the screen, and since it doesn't (yet) have save support or text input there's really no reason for a toolbar or Journal integration. Mind you, minimal save/resume support might be nice to have on all platforms someday. On 2009-08-29, Gary C Martin <g...@garycmartin.com> wrote: > Hi Ben, > > On 29 Aug 2009, at 18:24, Ben Wiley Sittler wrote: > >> I think, then, that I would rather just ship it as an activity bundle >> for "Sugar+Java or Sugar+OpenJDK", since the versioning issues (which >> OpenJDK version should I use, exactly?), licensing issues (GPLv2 & >> GPLv2+classpath-exception for OpenJDK vs. GPLv3 for SarynPaint,) >> packaging unknowns (how does one run OpenJDK from a subdirectory, >> exactly?), and bloat make bundling a JRE inside the .xo ridiculously >> impractical. I'm halfway tempted to try to subset OpenJDK for this (to >> reduce bloat), but that seems like an even bigger nightmare. > > Sorry if this is a controversial comment, but would you considered > porting the code to Python? It looks like a nice starter chunk of code > for someone interested in Python and or Sugar Activities. > > Regards, > --Gary > _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
