[SoaS] [DP] Question One

Martin Dengler martin at martindengler.com
Mon Sep 28 21:04:19 EDT 2009

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 08:01:52PM -0400, Bill Bogstad wrote:
> >Martin wrote:
> >
> > The DP has considered questions posed and proposes the following
> > directions for ratification by SLOB:
> >
> >> *  Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just
> >>    an upstream producing Sugar releases?
> >
> > No.  Sugar Labs is focused on Sugar and its Activities as its primary
> > marketed software products.  GNU/Linux distributors exist separate
> > from Sugar Labs.  Sugar Labs helps them with feedback and Sugar
> > packaging support, but does not distribute an installable GNU/Linux
> > image.
> In previous messages, I believe that myself, Sdz, Caryl, and Abhishek
> have to a greater or lesser extent answered this
> question as Yes.

I understand you and Caryl to be a clear Yes.  I'm not sure about sdz
- we'll have to wait until he's back.

> [Sugar Labs' mission] is to support the Sugar community of users and
> developers and establish regional, Sugar Labs around the world to
> help learn how to [learn] by tailoring Sugar to local languages and
> curricula.

Just want to not that the actionable part of the mission is "...to
help [omitted] learn how to learn...".  That's non-technical language.
There's nothing there remotely directly mentioning or implying
becoming a GNU/Linux distributor.

> [This mission] can not be accomplished at this time without a Sugar
> Labs produced distribution (or perhaps more accurately a 'spin' of
> some pre-existing distribution).

Such a task is broad in scope and huge in execution, especially in
relation to the number of users targeted.

Why do you think such a huge task is such a critical part of "[helping
people] learn how to learn"?

Please note that Sugar Labs is *not* currently a GNU/Linux
distributor, so your proposed "Yes" is a change in the status quo.

> I would request those panel member who have not yet said anything on
> this question or are inaccurately included above to do so.

Defintely - I hoped to get people involved by my reply, as well.  But
are they actually subscribed yet?

I think if they haven't subscribed yet and read the archive, apart
from absense, we need to ping them directly and ask them to get involved.

> There was some hope that this panel would arrive at its decisions by
> consensus.

Consensus doesn't mean immediate agreement.

> Sam offered to act as facilitator for such a process as well.  As I
> feel strongly about this question, I think Sam's services are
> probably now required.

I'm not sure what SJ's going to do besides ask exploratory questions
like above.

> Bill Bogstad


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/soas/attachments/20090929/b6a87e0b/attachment.pgp 

More information about the SoaS mailing list