[Sugar-devel] Activity packaging

[Michael Stone]

Aleksey wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 01:18:04AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
>> Bernie wrote:
>> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 12:02 -0400, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
>> >> I think you are missing an important requirement: installation without
>> >> elevated permissions.
>> >
>> > Rainbow has been bit-rotting for the past 2 years 
>> 
>> Ahem. Sugar's integration with rainbow has bit-rotted, been rebuilt, and still
>> received no independent testing despite repeated calls for same.
>
> To be honest I wasn't a fan of rainbow a bit time ago..
>
> But having Zero Sugar fully implemented and potential possibility to launch
> almost any piece of software... rainbow should be more then essential
> requirement.

Let's be clear: the actual requirement is for something more like "safety" or
"isolation". 

Rainbow is merely one of several reasonable approaches -- and competition and
interoperability would be no bad thing here.

Michael

P.S. - Several other isolation shells that might be worth thinking about, if
only to better understand the tradeoffs that rainbow makes, are briefly
described at 

   http://sandboxing.org

P.P.S. - Also, either way, thanks for your encouragement. :)