[Sugar-devel] Future of Rainbow + Sugar?
bert at freudenbergs.de
Tue Feb 24 13:23:04 EST 2009
On 24.02.2009, at 19:09, Carol Farlow Lerche wrote:
> Bert, Are you satisfied with the number of activity developers?
> Are you satisfied with the number of developers within the
> deployments? Have you noticed the periodic questions on the
> developer-oriented lists about Rainbow security and whether it is
> causing mysterious symptoms? I'm not, and I have.
I am virtually certain that Rainbow is not the major obstacle to
getting more activity developers.
> Asking for better documentation doesn't imply that the facility is
> new. It recognizes that development has reached a local minimum in
> an important component that is not well understood by many. My post
> was a request to the most knowledgeable person, Michael to do the
> service of taking the time to write a document that clearly lays out
> . the purpose (not in security speak but in terms of the benefits
> it brings to end users),
> . the relevance of APIs versus packaging elements versus choices by
> the sugar shell/infrastructure developers,
> . things that the activity developers can and can't do (given that
> I, at least, hope that new developers will participate, who have
> preconceptions from other environments),
> Things that are hoped for in future development (well delimited from
> things that are there now.)
> Good documentation is hard, and wiki pages are only good
> documentation if the wiki is maintained with great discipline (which
> I fear is not the case at w.l.o). But for a subtle and complex
> feature such as Rainbow, good documentation would be a motivator for
> use both within and outside the sugar community.
Agreed. However, what activity authors need to know about rainbow is
documented, and it really is not much. For example, here
This is not even a full page, and if activity authors use the Python
Sugar toolkit they can worry even less about this.
- Bert -
More information about the Devel