[SoaS] DP summary of discussion time?

[Tim McNamara]

2009/10/7 Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com>

> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Tabitha Roder <tabitha at hrdnz.com> wrote:
> > My answers:
> > Question 1: "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than
> > just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"
> > 1. no - don't want to force people to use one distribution as this
> > could create a barrier to entry
> >
> > Question 2: "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing
> > Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another?"
> > 2. yes - neutral about what distribution you base Sugar on so as not
> > to create barriers to entry for anyone
>
> I see two  variants to this question that we might want to ask separately:
>
> 2+ : "Should SL be neutral about all distros containing Sugar,
> regardless of how integral Sugar is to the distro and its intended
> uses?"
>
> 2.1: "Should SL be available to provide outreach, publicity campaigns,
> mentoring and other support for distributions [containing | centered
> around] Sugar?"
>

Hi Samuel,

I recognise that I'm not on the panel, but may I just get clarification on
what you mean by these two alternate questions?

It seems like a clearer interpretation of the word 'neutral' is what you're
seeking.

Are you separating technical interoperability vs wider support? This might
be phrased as passive support for Sugar being on other distros, vs active
support from Sugar Labs. I interpreted the original question as technical
interoperability.

Thanks, this is an interesting thread to follow. -timClicks
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/soas/attachments/20091008/071f5c3c/attachment.htm