[SoaS] [DP]Question One

[David Farning]

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Bill Bogstad <bogstad at pobox.com> wrote:
> [I changed the subject of this note in order to start a new thread
> separate from the announcement.]
>
> Note: To the gallery, the DB actually started exchanging messages a
> couple of days ago before it was clear where/how
> we would communicate.  So some of the below will be out of context.]
>
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Martin Dengler
> <martin at martindengler.com> wrote:
>> As an attempt at speeding this up, I propose the following outline of
>> the DP report to SLOB:
>
> In a previous message, I suggested that questions #2-4 of those posed
> to us are linked to #1 so I'm going to only respond to that part of
> your  draft statement.
>
>>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.  In particular, I feel that this mission statement
> about Sugar Labs from
>
> http://www.sugarlabs.org/index.php?template=page&page=about_overview
>
> What is Sugar Labs?
>
> Sugar Labs, a volunteer-driven, non-profit organization, is a member
> project of the Software Freedom Conservancy. The mission of Sugar Labs
> is to support the Sugar community of users and developers and
> establish regional, Sugar around the world to help learn how to by
> tailoring Sugar to local languages and curricula.
>
> can not be accomplished at this time without a Sugar Labs produced
> distribution (or perhaps more accurately a 'spin' of some pre-existing
> distribution).

One of the primary reasons for Spinning Sugar Labs off from OLPC was
to create a abstraction barrier between upstream sugar development and
OLPC specific needs.  How did that abstraction barrier strengthen or
weaken OLPC and Sugar Labs decision making and development process?
What has changed in the last 18 months to make those abstraction
barriers more or less necessary?  How will those abstraction barriers
be affected by having Sugar Labs produce a distribution?

david

> It may be that I've misunderstood other panel members messages on this
> question and I believe most members haven't
> made any statement to the panel on the question.   I would request
> those panel member who have not yet said anything on this question or
> are inaccurately included above to do so.
>
> There was some hope that this panel would arrive at its decisions by
> consensus.  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.
>
> Bill Bogstad
> _______________________________________________
> SoaS mailing list
> SoaS at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
>