[IAEP] [SLOBS] [PROJECT PROPOSAL REQUEST] Sugar Creation Kit

[Sebastian Dziallas]

On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com> wrote:
> Satellit (Tom Gilliard) has submitted a request to have the Sugar
> Creation Kit become an official Sugar Labs project and consequently be
> listed on the sidebar of the wiki (See email below). Could we discuss
> this proposal by email (since we are unlikely to find a time to meet
> as a group over the next few weeks due to conflicting travel
> schedules?

Since I'm not wearing a SLOBs hat, I'm not going to vote here. :)

One thing that is orthagonal to the original question but that should
probably be checked anyway is - since Sugar on a Stick is an official
Fedora Spin - how the Fedora trademark guidelines apply.

--Sebastian

> regards.
>
> -walter
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Thomas C Gilliard <satellit at bendbroadband.com>
> Date: Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 7:53 AM
> Subject: IAEP Digest, Vol 28, Issue 18   Consider
> the,    SugarCreationKit DVD a Project?
> To: Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com>
>
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 10:09:37 -0700
> From: Thomas C Gilliard <satellit at bendbroadband.com>
> Subject: Re: [IAEP] IAEP Digest, Vol 28, Issue 18   Consider the
>        SugarCreationKit DVD a Project?
> To: iaep at lists.sugarlabs.org
> Message-ID: <4C39FAD1.10809 at bendbroadband.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>>
>> ---------- MOTION -----------
>>
>> First, the short version:
>>
>> 1. If your project helps SL, is all freely licensed, and has a wiki page
>> with certain info on it, you can apply for project status by emailing
>> slobs/iaep your wiki page URL and saying "here's our project page,
>> please raise a motion to make us a project."
>>
>
>
> Question re Sugar Creation Kit DVD:
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/Tgillard/SugarCreationKit-123.iso
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Creation_Kit
>
> -This is really a compilation of SL Content on a DVD
> where does such a project fit in this spectrum of Projects?
> It probably would have qualified under the previous Project Category:
> "wiki pages bearing the [[Category:Project]] tag predating this proposal."
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Category:Project
>
> It would be nice to get a left sidebar listing for the DVD.iso  and move
> it's location to Downloads from Tgillard
>
> Tom Gilliard
> satellit
>
> A related situation exists for the ASLOxo.iso with .xo files for Drag
> Drop Installs:
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Soas_V4/ASLOxo_Activity_Test_Table
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/Tgillard/ASLOxo-3ss.iso
> (This may depend on the .xo file format remaining one of the ways
> Activities are distributed)
>
>
>> 2. If SLOBs passes the motion (4 votes of +1), you are a project. This
>> gets you a sidebar listing, do-it-yourself infrastructure access, and
>> permission to call yourselves a SL project.
>>
>> 3. Projects are obligated to update their project page and email that
>> project page URL to the list during the last month of each Sugar release
>> cycle. That's it.
>>
>> 4. If a project doesn't do this (SLOBs will check), its project status
>> is revoked, and it loses the sidebar listing and the ability to call
>> itself a SL project. Projects who have their status revoked may reapply,
>> see (1).
>>
>> Now, the fine print:
>>
>> Being a SL project means you get (1) listed in the sidebar, (2) full use
>> of SL infrastructure's resources (though projects must do the
>> administrative work themselves, they'll get machine access) if the
>> project isn't already using them, and (3) permission to refer to
>> yourselves as a SL project (you can request TM usage separately).
>>
>> Being a SL project does NOT mean that (1) SL teams are obligated to
>> fulfil all your requests, or that (2) SLOBs or SL teams can tell you
>> what to do, or that (3) anyone else will step up and make your project
>> happen - people working on a project still need to step up and drive and
>> do all the work.
>>
>> The only thing SLOBs can do is remove "SL Project" status, which (1)
>> removes a project from the sidebar and (2) the project not being able to
>> refer to itself as a "SL project" any more. (Infrastructure privileges
>> shouldn't be removed except in cases of gross misconduct.)
>>
>> SL projects must:
>> * work towards the mission of SL in some way,
>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs#Mission
>> * contain only code and content released under approved licenses,
>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Trademark#Approved_licenses
>>
>> To request status as a SL project, create a project wiki page that
>> contains (at minimum) the following information, and submit it to SLOBs
>> as an agenda item ("here is our project wiki page, can we be a project?")
>>
>> (these are directly from the version of
>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Project_Guidelines as of this
>> writing)
>>
>> * Who the new project would serve and who will lead the project
>> * What the goals and scope of the new project would be
>> * When the project can be considered a success
>> * Where the project will lead and where it will fit into Sugar Labs
>> * Why the idea warrants the creation of a new project within Sugar Labs
>> * How the project will benefit Sugar Labs and the Sugar ecosystem
>> * The number of active contributors
>> * The state of the project compared to its goals
>> * Documentation of how the project is working for the community
>> * The current method of governing the project
>> * A schedule and plan to achieve remaining goals and milestones
>>
>> This then becomes a motion that needs 4 SLOBs +1s to pass, just like any
>> other motion.
>>
>> The only obligation of a project is to submit a status report, in the
>> form of emailing iaep a link toan updated project wiki page with
>> up-to-date answers to all the same above questions, during the last
>> month of each sugar release cycle. One week after each Sugar release
>> cycle, SLOBs will check which projects have fulfilled that obligation,
>> renew the project status of all projects that have, and revoke project
>> status of all projects that haven't. Projects that haven't can simply
>> reapply.
>>
>> ------------
>>
>> How reasonable does this sound to everyone? Amendments? Changes? If you
>> want to make substantial edits, please throw this on a wiki page and
>> send us all the link. ;)
>>
>> --Mel
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Walter Bender
> Sugar Labs
> http://www.sugarlabs.org
> _______________________________________________
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
>