<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Martin Dengler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:martin@martindengler.com">martin@martindengler.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"> <div class="im">On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 03:37:59AM -0400, Samuel Klein wrote:<br> > On timing: 2 weeks is a recommendation, but a deadline is not a bad<br> > thing. Rather than debate it, why don't we plan to draft a statement<br> > this week.<br> <br> </div>The draft is <a href="http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Decision_panels/SOAS#Report" target="_blank">http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Decision_panels/SOAS#Report</a><br> .<br> <br> Please can someone else help with it - right now a few people have put<br> their names down next to votes, but nobody's gone further than my<br> skeleton draft.<br> <div class="im"><br> > > 1. "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an<br> > > upstream producing Sugar releases?"<br> > ><br> > > 2. "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and<br> > > refuse to endorse one over another?"<br> > ><br> > > 3. "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to<br> > > avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?"<br> </div>[...]<br> <div class="im">> #1 is a question of whether SL should channel development effort into<br> > producing distributions.<br> <br> </div>Substitute "development" with "significant" and I agree this is a good<br> characterisation.<br> <div class="im"><br> > #2 is a question of whether SL should be neutral in its promotional<br> > materials.<br> <br> </div>Not just that - its infrastructure effort and resource choices, as<br> well as many other non-artifact-generating activities, like conference<br> participation, deployment pitches ("here's our software and our CD"<br> vs. "here's our software and you have to get someone else to give you<br> a CD") . For example, it makes sense to spend infrastructure team<br> time to support an endorsed distro with a bugtracker. It makes less<br> sense to spend infrastructure team time to support every distro that<br> ships Sugar.<br> <div class="im"><br> > #3 is about encouraging the community to avoid confusion in naming<br> <br> </div>Yes.<br> <br> > [...] which can be done neutrally.<br> <br> Can be done neutrally but is hard to do. Witness the flamewar about<br> SoaS naming in June:<br> <br> <a href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-June/006509.html" target="_blank">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-June/006509.html</a><br> <br> It's hard to be neutral unless the confused things come into existence<br> roughly concurrently. For example, if SL were to ask the owners of<br> <a href="http://sugaronastick.com" target="_blank">sugaronastick.com</a>, which weren't distributing SoaS-Fedora, to stop<br> using "Sugar on a Stick", the (long-time) prior marketing of<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I assume this is a hypothetical. SugaronaStick.com is distributing Fedora and its is the same as what I'm using in the GPA except for the network settings and which activities are preloaded and stared.</div> <div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Caroline Meeks<br>Solution Grove<br>Caroline@SolutionGrove.com<br> <br>617-500-3488 - Office<br>505-213-3268 - Fax<br>