<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
Hi...<div><br></div><div>I love Sean's idea of listing and linking to resources from deployments around the world. With Google Translate these are accessible to everyone regardless of their language. </div><div><br></div><div>I would also like to see some of the Activities that are "living" back on the old OLPC wiki under "Activities All" listed on the Sugar Labs wiki as well. I had given up on finding the Star Chart Activity after searching every way I could think of on the Sugar Labs Activities list. Finally I stumbled on it and several other useful science related Activities back on the OLPC wiki. I was looking for them for the Big Sky Science Partnership for Montana Reservation Schools (Montana State U and the Crow and Northern Cheyenne). They are doing a small Contributors Program project.</div><div><br></div><div>Sharing resources is nice!</div><div><br></div><div>Caryl<br><br>> From: sdaly.be@gmail.com<br>> Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 11:15:37 -0400<br>> To: bernie@sugarlabs.org<br>> CC: mel@melchua.com; iaep@lists.sugarlabs.org; slobs@lists.sugarlabs.org<br>> Subject: Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOBs] F11+0.88+XO1.* as a SL project<br>> <br>> The OLPCNews commenter in question is anti-Sugar and believes all of<br>> our resources should be supporting OLPC and its deployments (and none<br>> elsewhere).<br>> <br>> I haven't seen any evidence that there is a perception problem that we<br>> are biased towards certain vendors. If anything, the perception is<br>> that we are "the software on the $100 laptop". We may have issues the<br>> day we are referenced on the CMPC, Dell or HP edu netbooks, but that<br>> hasn't happened yet.<br>> <br>> For my part I think listing projects is a fine idea, it shows our tent<br>> is big and welcoming. We just need to very clear that we don't provide<br>> "tech support" for these projects.<br>> <br>> Sugar on a Stick has been an important part of our outreach since it<br>> lowers the unfamiliarity and installation barriers. However, we have<br>> often referred to other projects in our communications, among them<br>> Paraguay Educa, Plan Ceibal, and the Palestine Education Initiative.<br>> Some of these projects have marketing/PR people who are always pleased<br>> to work with us.<br>> <br>> While we're at it, we could list Sugar deployments, too, since they<br>> often have Sugar information and documentation of interest, e.g.<br>> http://www.ceibal.edu.uy/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=107&Itemid=268<br>> , an XO manual with many pages presenting Sugar.<br>> <br>> Sean<br>> <br>> <br>> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Bernie Innocenti <bernie@sugarlabs.org> wrote:<br>> > El Fri, 25-06-2010 a las 13:23 -0400, Mel Chua escribió:<br>> ><br>> >> 2. cjb and tomeu and mchua are wondering whether that infrastructure<br>> >> access (which you *don't* need SL project status for!) was what the<br>> >> project was asking for, or if there was anything more to the request to<br>> >> become an "official project" - what resources, specifically, would they<br>> >> want from SL that they think becoming a "SL project" will grant them?<br>> >> Bernie, can you respond?<br>> ><br>> > In addition to the hosting and bandwidth, I would like to ask for<br>> > permission to add a link to F11-0.88 to the wiki sidebar, below SoaS.<br>> ><br>> > Cjb said that it was not an issue for OLPC, but Tomeu was still<br>> > concerned that other downstream projects could be negatively affected by<br>> > our endorsement of an XO distribution. What makes us look really biased<br>> > is having just SoaS in our Projects side-bar.<br>> ><br>> > In fact, I exchanged a few emails with a F11-0.88 tester who refused to<br>> > file activity bugs on bugs.sugarlabs.org because "I'm not interested in<br>> > how Sugar runs on desktop machines (nor on Ubuntu, etc.)" :-(<br>> ><br>> > This comment of an OLPCNews reader is even more eloquent:<br>> ><br>> > http://www.olpcnews.com/software/operating_system/the_best_xo_laptop_operating_s.html#comment-296246<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > We seem to have a problem of perception of SL being biased towards<br>> > specific vendors. To fix that, we could either choose to stop working<br>> > with anyone, or we could offer the same service level to any downstream<br>> > project asking for Sugar Labs hosting. Currently, our infrastructure is<br>> > also hosting these partners:<br>> ><br>> > * OLE - http://www.ole.org<br>> > * OLE Nepal - http://olenepal.org/<br>> > * Paraguay Educa (some services)<br>> > * Karma - http://karma.sugarlabs.org<br>> > * Somos Azucar - http://somosazucar.org<br>> > * GCompris (only the git repository)<br>> > * ZeroInstall (only a package repository)<br>> ><br>> > I would personally *love* to give more visibility to all of these<br>> > through links in our wiki. Only Karma and GCompris would really qualify<br>> > as hosted Projects. The others are partnering organizations. OLE Nepal<br>> > should really be a Local Lab.<br>> ><br>> > As far as I'm concerned, we could even extend the same invitation to<br>> > other Sugar related projects that are being hosted at disparate, obscure<br>> > locations: eXe, Trisquel Sugar, Ubuntu Sugar Remix...<br>> ><br>> > Mel asked an interesting question: what exactly is a Project? Some time<br>> > ago, David Farning studied the issue and posted a criteria for endorsing<br>> > sub-projects modeled after the Eclipse and Apache models, two very large<br>> > and very successful umbrella projects.<br>> ><br>> > In two years of Infrastructure Team coordination, I don't remember ever<br>> > refusing any hosting, syndication or account request. Why? Because I<br>> > believe that "Stop Energy" fundamentally hurts organizations like ours.<br>> > We've been quite successful at hosting activities because there's almost<br>> > zero stop energy in the way of contributors. The same could happen in<br>> > other areas as well.<br>> ><br>> > Unlike a business, we don't need to focus their resources just on<br>> > revenue-making activities. Our fuel actually comes from contributors,<br>> > there's rarely anything to gain by telling them to go away.<br>> ><br>> > --<br>> > // Bernie Innocenti - http://codewiz.org/<br>> > \X/ Sugar Labs - http://sugarlabs.org/<br>> ><br>> > _______________________________________________<br>> > SLOBs mailing list<br>> > SLOBs@lists.sugarlabs.org<br>> > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/slobs<br>> ><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)<br>> IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org<br>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep<br></div>                                            </body>
</html>