Versions

[Mark Shuttleworth]

Right. The trickier cases are things like control of a device or
particular subnet, where there is only one of those things. That means
you need to assign the thing to one or other of the frameworks. Docker,
for example, would be tricky.

Mark

On 01/11/15 13:25, Gábor Paller wrote:
> " I don't think it's going to be
> quite that simple in practice, but we understand the driver."
>
> I know that in theory, separating frameworks that do nasty things, e.g. use
> persistent storage at a predetermined location and corrupting the other
> version's data is impossible. Still, Linux distros, e.g. Ubuntu do this
> routinely. I have GTK2 and GTK3 installed on my Ubuntu desktop and they
> coexist peacefully. Android also solved this problem. Normally the solution
> may be as simple as a consistent directory layout. Snappy used to have that
> layout.
>
> Regards,
> Gabor
>
> On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Mark Shuttleworth <mark at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
>> On 01/11/15 09:20, Gábor Paller wrote:
>>> All I say that OSGi went through this, Say, you have framework1.0 and you
>>> build app1.0 that depends on framework1.0. Later on, you introduce
>>> framework2.0 and you build another app, anotherapp1.0 that depends on
>>> framework2.0. Now it just so happens that you need to install app1.0 and
>>> anotherapp1.0 on the same system. This means that you have to also
>> install
>>> framework1.0 and framework2.0 at the same time and you have to be able to
>>> tell that app1.0 uses framework1.0 and anotherapp1.0 uses framework2.0.
>> Yes, at a high level we've said that all frameworks should be
>> co-installable, for this very reason. I don't think it's going to be
>> quite that simple in practice, but we understand the driver.
>>
>> Mark
>>