Re: Autopackage Vs Zero Install

--001485f1d9129ee8ae046fcb3765
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I think "autopackage" is a far cooler name that "zero install".  I mean,
while their name might sound trendy and all, the autopackage name is
descriptive and thus should live their name...  In the end, user's of their
system will just think of Coca Cola Zero.

Matthew

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Scott Pakin <[email protected]> wrote:

> Pablo Garralda wrote:
> >            Reading Autopackage F.A.Q. I've just found a link to "Zero
> > Install" which it seems to have an approach similar to Autopackage. In
> > its site, there is a table comparing several options, including Zero
> > install and Autopackage among others. Of course, According to its page,
> > Zero Install rocks. ;)
> >
> >            Does anybody know the advantages of Autopackage over Zero
> > Install? Better portability, perhaps? Or its just a different approach?
>
> If I recall correctly, the two approaches are in fact compatible.  You
> can create an Autopackage that handles distribution independence and
> other portability concerns then use Zero Install to keep track of
> whether a new version of your package is available (using version
> numbers and hashes), download and install into Zero Install space if
> necessary, and run the top-level executable from there.
>
> -- Scott
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: autopackage-dev-unsubscribe-OfajU3CKLf1/[email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: autopackage-dev-help-OfajU3CKLf1/[email protected]
>
>

--001485f1d9129ee8ae046fcb3765
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think &quot;autopackage&quot; is a far cooler name that &quot;zero instal=
l&quot;.=A0 I mean, while their name might sound trendy and all, the autopa=
ckage name is descriptive and thus should live their name...=A0 In the end,=
 user&#39;s of their system will just think of Coca Cola Zero.<br>
<br>Matthew<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:10 =
PM, Scott Pakin <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">pak=
[email protected]</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; =
padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class=3D"h5">Pablo Garralda wrote:<br>
&gt; =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Reading Autopackage F.A.Q. I&#39;ve just found =
a link to &quot;Zero<br>
&gt; Install&quot; which it seems to have an approach similar to Autopackag=
e. In<br>
&gt; its site, there is a table comparing several options, including Zero<b=
r>
&gt; install and Autopackage among others. Of course, According to its page=
,<br>
&gt; Zero Install rocks. ;)<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Does anybody know the advantages of Autopackage=
 over Zero<br>
&gt; Install? Better portability, perhaps? Or its just a different approach=
?<br>
<br>
</div></div>If I recall correctly, the two approaches are in fact compatibl=
e. =A0You<br>
can create an Autopackage that handles distribution independence and<br>
other portability concerns then use Zero Install to keep track of<br>
whether a new version of your package is available (using version<br>
numbers and hashes), download and install into Zero Install space if<br>
necessary, and run the top-level executable from there.<br>
<br>
-- Scott<br>
<br>
---------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <a href=3D"mailto:autopackage-dev-unsubscribe@sunsi=
te.dk">autopackage-dev-unsubscribe-OfajU3CKLf1/[email protected]</a><br>
For additional commands, e-mail: <a href=3D"mailto:autopackage-dev-help@sun=
site.dk">autopackage-dev-help-OfajU3CKLf1/[email protected]</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>

--001485f1d9129ee8ae046fcb3765--