[IAEP] [SLOBS] SLOBs Position on SoaS
martin at martindengler.com
Thu Sep 24 11:49:37 EDT 2009
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 03:28:11PM -0400, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi all,
> > Let me rephrase again, to make things clear. I'd love to hear an
> > "official" answer on this. Soon.
> > Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs
> > distributes a Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution?
I'd like to remind people that _this_ is the original question.
Please note the parts: "current SoaS", "primary", and "distributes a
... distribution". I welcome pointers to significant modifications or
> Martin Dengler has persuaded me that having SLOBs vote on this issue
> could help us move forward, even though there obviously isn't
> community consensus on it yet.
> I'd need to know what the specific questions (with yes/no
> answers) that people are interested in a vote on at the SLOBs
> meeting next week would be. Some things I've read that might
> be those questions go something like:
> "Should Sugar Labs be a Linux distributor, rather than just an
> upstream producing Sugar releases?"
> "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and
> refuse to endorse one over another?"
> "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community
> to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora
Thanks for writing these. This is a fine list of questions.
> To avoid forcing a vote on questions that shouldn't be answered by
> SLOBs, I propose that the answers for each vote should be:
> * Yes
> * No
> * We should talk about this question more before voting on it
> * We shouldn't vote on this question for some reason (e.g. ambiguity
> in the question, or wanting to abstain)
This is a great list of alternatives, and I think it's very helpful
for the future to be able to get a non-Yes answer, to save future
debate/confusion. This is why some questions that I've heard
dismissed as "too complex" should still be at least asked.
> To add a question to the list (I'm not going to add any of them
> myself), please add to the bullet points at:
I note nobody's done this, so I added those three questions, suitably
phrased to reflect the fact that SLOBs is now voting on what to ask
the Decision Panel to report on.
> - Chris, wearing SLOB hat.
1. I'd like to invite people to consider which of them would _not_ be
clearly answered by an answer to the original question.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20090924/c7f0cb25/attachment.pgp
More information about the IAEP