Difference between revisions of "Activities/Activity Library"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Ideas) |
RafaelOrtiz (talk | contribs) (→Ideas) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== Ideas == | == Ideas == | ||
| − | * | + | * Support 0install by design |
** use .xo format only if requested by user | ** use .xo format only if requested by user | ||
** otherwise, activities should just start by click | ** otherwise, activities should just start by click | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
*** with 0launch (or with a special variant) it will be possible to run Library activities out of the ''Activity Library'' activity | *** with 0launch (or with a special variant) it will be possible to run Library activities out of the ''Activity Library'' activity | ||
| − | * | + | * Support forks |
** bundle_id should not be owned by any one developer. For the same bundle_id, there could be dozens of activities (and not only direct forks) | ** bundle_id should not be owned by any one developer. For the same bundle_id, there could be dozens of activities (and not only direct forks) | ||
| − | * | + | * No strict editors policy |
** by default (or at least, there should be such an option), any user can launch any activity w/o additional steps (such as being logged in to ASLO) | ** by default (or at least, there should be such an option), any user can launch any activity w/o additional steps (such as being logged in to ASLO) | ||
** there could be review profiles. A user could apply such a profile to disperse all activities to reviewing groups, e.g., Featured, Major, Trash etc. | ** there could be review profiles. A user could apply such a profile to disperse all activities to reviewing groups, e.g., Featured, Major, Trash etc. | ||
** such profiles could be also created for particular deployment and tested by QA teams | ** such profiles could be also created for particular deployment and tested by QA teams | ||
| − | * | + | * Support 0install stability profiles, e.g., Stable, Development, Buggy |
| − | * | + | * Support local user profile, e.g., |
** use only Stable versions | ** use only Stable versions | ||
** make my-favorite-developer's activities always show while using list | ** make my-favorite-developer's activities always show while using list | ||
| − | * | + | * One button click update, i.e., synchronize current activities with server's (taking into account |
| − | * | + | * Provide centralized stats that are easy-to-use by activity developers (option in activity.info), and easy-to-view by Activity Library users. |
** counting successful/failed launches by SP level, could be useful to judge activity stability | ** counting successful/failed launches by SP level, could be useful to judge activity stability | ||
** tracking average duration of use or number of launches, etc. | ** tracking average duration of use or number of launches, etc. | ||
Latest revision as of 23:34, 30 May 2011
Ideas
- Support 0install by design
- use .xo format only if requested by user
- otherwise, activities should just start by click
- activities will be represented by regular 0install feeds
- more flexible dependency checking than on ASLO (currently, only SP version), if activity requires a recent gst to run, it just declares that gst version
- a variety of activity versions will be checked at runtime to detect what versions could be run on that particular machine before launching
- with 0launch (or with a special variant) it will be possible to run Library activities out of the Activity Library activity
- Support forks
- bundle_id should not be owned by any one developer. For the same bundle_id, there could be dozens of activities (and not only direct forks)
- No strict editors policy
- by default (or at least, there should be such an option), any user can launch any activity w/o additional steps (such as being logged in to ASLO)
- there could be review profiles. A user could apply such a profile to disperse all activities to reviewing groups, e.g., Featured, Major, Trash etc.
- such profiles could be also created for particular deployment and tested by QA teams
- Support 0install stability profiles, e.g., Stable, Development, Buggy
- Support local user profile, e.g.,
- use only Stable versions
- make my-favorite-developer's activities always show while using list
- One button click update, i.e., synchronize current activities with server's (taking into account
- Provide centralized stats that are easy-to-use by activity developers (option in activity.info), and easy-to-view by Activity Library users.
- counting successful/failed launches by SP level, could be useful to judge activity stability
- tracking average duration of use or number of launches, etc.
- Integrate Collab mockup features
- not all who share activities are activity developers
Hierarchy of libraries
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 01:58:34PM +0000, Aleksey Lim wrote: > On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 08:46:06AM -0400, Bernie Innocenti wrote: > > Will it support multiple libraries, for the same of decentralizing > > things? > > > > I can imagine that many deployments would want a hierarchical thing to > > save bandwidth and delegate decisions to school principals: the > > schoolserver would be the first place where children search for > > activities, then would come the deployment server and lastly ASLO. > > Thanks, this hierarchical structure will be useful not only on pure > server side but on peers side as well, like: > > * someone added bunch of cool activities to his list (w/o > downloading|launching them) > * shares his Activity_Library instance > * any joined user can see|download|launch these activities
Related resources
TODO
- merge Features/Zero Sugar Activities with this page