Labs/Jetpack/Reboot FAQ: Difference between revisions

added more to answer
(added update to first question)
(added more to answer)
Line 78: Line 78:


Narwhal is an awesome project, but it's just moving too fast right now for us to use it as a dependency.  cfx is similar enough to narwhal/tusk that we might eventually be able to move over to it, and substitute out current Python code for JS.
Narwhal is an awesome project, but it's just moving too fast right now for us to use it as a dependency.  cfx is similar enough to narwhal/tusk that we might eventually be able to move over to it, and substitute out current Python code for JS.
'''Why is the Jetpack reboot so much harder to use than the original Jetpack prototype?'''
Our ultimate goal is to make the reboot as easy to develop extensions with and iterate on as the prototype.  Right now, the reboot is essentially the underlying command-line tools that a front-end IDE will use to make things much easier to use.  This front-end IDE will have similar developer ergonomics to the original prototype's interface.  When everything is finished, Jetpack developers will download and install a "Jetpack SDK" that will automatically set up a cfx/jpx environment and the front-end IDE on the developer's computer.
874

edits