[IAEP] SoaS as a Sugar Labs project.

Caroline Meeks solutiongrove at gmail.com
Mon Aug 24 15:11:03 EDT 2009

I agree that there is a tension between trying to set everything up the way
it should be when its fully grown and setting up the expectation that there
is more reality there then there is.
I worry a lot about over promising and setting too high of expectations for
Sugar on a Stick currently.

I worry about making it too complicated for people who want to get involved.

I wonder what the harm would be in waiting 6 months to do this.

But I also worry about getting distracted from the huge amount of work
I need to do to get ready for school by bureaucracy.  So
basically I'm not going to fight you on this. If those of you who have time
to think about it really want to do this I'm not going to put any energy
into fighting it and I'll deal with whatever happens.

On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Martin Langhoff
<martin.langhoff at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:22 PM, David Farning<dfarning at sugarlabs.org>
> wrote:
> > Eclipse and Apache both have criteria for becoming a official
> Note that Apache's reason to run this "Apache Projects" is to _extend
> the legal protection shield to other projects_. If doesn't care one
> zot about what the resulting software _does_. And they only looked
> into that once they had their main mission (the webserver) pretty much
> cooked.
> I've advised several projects that wanted to "do like apache", and
> once they understood what apache does, they did not want to "do like
> apache" no more :-)
> And also... and completely from the outside... I'll apologise in
> advance for saying something I know might be controversial. I worry
> that SL seems to have -- for a external party like me -- more
> bureaucracy than it has people "doing". IMHExperience, the projects I
> enjoy working on, and that I see being productive have  a much lower
> "procedure/label/committe " : contributor ratio.
> Boards, subprojects and such are good things to remember to do when a
> project gets big and tensions surface (aside from some specific things
> you want "right" from the start -- license, etc).
> This comment is not meant as a trolling attempt (though I fear it'll
> end up in tears). The core of what I am trying to say is: doing these
> things too early has some risks -- just off the top of my head
>  - The FOSS version of being top-heavy, the distraction
>  - Newcomers reading all these big names (board, procedures, the board
> blessing the SIG) and getting the wrong idea about the project -- this
> can discourage the go-getters that like get-it-done environments.
>  - Fostering armchair quarterbackers (like yours truly right now :-/ )
> and endless bickering (hmm! debian-legal) -- these are attracted to
> "big name" and "big infra" projects.
> I really like GregDek's line:
> > I would avoid elections for as long as possible.  Vote with your work.
> Time for me to shut up. From now on I assume you know about these
> risks, and won't mention the topic in polite company no more. After
> all, I am not working my ass off on SL, you are.
> Thanks for your patience :-)
> m
> --
>  martin.langhoff at gmail.com
>  martin at laptop.org -- School Server Architect
>  - ask interesting questions
>  - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
>  - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff
> _______________________________________________
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep

Caroline Meeks
Solution Grove
Caroline at SolutionGrove.com

617-500-3488 - Office
505-213-3268 - Fax
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20090824/54f05af0/attachment.htm 

More information about the IAEP mailing list