On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 02:31:54PM +0000, Aleksey Lim wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 08:28:57AM -0400, Walter Bender wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Aleksey Lim > > <alsr...@activitycentral.org>wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:02:58AM +0200, Simon Schampijer wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > the bundlebuilder uses git to package the tarballs and xo-bundles [1]. I > > > > would therefore say, the git should be a dependency for the > > > > sugar-toolkit and should be added to the Platform components. > > > > > > > > Any objections about that? > > > > > > I personally treated SP as a runtime dependencies stack. Making bundles > > > is a development workflow and it will be useless in pure runtime > > > environment. > > > > > > -- > > > Aleksey > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sugar-devel mailing list > > > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > > > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > > > > > > > > > Maybe what we need is a git activity that kids interested in developing can > > download??? > > Ideally for me, git is the right dependency for SDK > <string>Software</strike>Sugar <strike>Development</strike>Doers' Kit > we don't have right now. > > Using activity, in current state of .xo format, will mean either bundling > git (sounds weird) or not working in defualt Sugar environment (but making > it working, will mean blowing SP all time w/o the limit).
> The right way for me, is adding PackageKit dependency to SP, that might > be used directly (e.g, using PK DBus in the bundler) or indirectly in Sweets > (that might be added to SP as well). For indirect usage in Sweets, I meant something like subrocess.check_call(['sweets', 'git', ...]) i.e, hight level call to lauch git with installing it from PackageKit if there is such need. -- Aleksey _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel