[Sugar-devel] [IAEP] [ANNOUNCE] Feature Policy updated
tomeu at sugarlabs.org
Sun Dec 6 16:19:59 EST 2009
2009/11/29 Simon Schampijer <simon at schampijer.de>:
> On 11/27/2009 09:00 PM, Sascha Silbe wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 07:40:26PM +0100, Simon Schampijer wrote:
>>> * Backup up by the community *
>>> The proposer of the feature has to get feedback from the community.
>>> This includes technical feedback, feedback from the deployments etc.
>>> See as well in the last paragraph about which points the community
>>> might care. Of course there will be some different opinions in the
>>> community - in general there should be more YES than NO in the
>>> community for a feature to be able to get into a Sugar release.
>> This puts the burden of interacting with deployments on each individual
>> feature proposer (but away from the core developers, which is a good
>> How is that supposed to happen (getting feedback from deployments)?
>> Writing to iaep? What if nobody replies to those messages (e.g. because
>> it doesn't matter to them either way), will the feature be rejected even
>> if it's a good idea? (*)
> Yes, sending an email to sugar-devel - see here the section community
> consensus . So deployments for example interested in the evolution of
> the Sugar platform should read sugar-devel and watch out for the
> [FEATURE] tag. Of course not only deployers are invited to comment.
> The idea is to have the submitter of a Feature taking care of getting
> the feedback. He is the one that knows best about the feature. It is
> good practice to interact with the community, too. The release manager
> is just there to make sure the process is done correctly.
I think the deployment team can play a strong role here, but it's
currently in need of re-energizing. In the meantime, I think you can
ask people like Daniel Drake, Martin Langhoff, Caroline, Walter, me,
etc. to proxy that request to others or share whatever we may have
heard about the need in the field. Local labs might also be able to
There's also a page in the wiki that lists some contacts in
deployments that are active in the community, should be something like
>> (*) Obviously "good idea" is quite subjective, but I assume you
>> understand what I mean.
> I guess we have to use common sense for that. There are guidelines 
> what you should thinks about before proposing a feature. I hope we don't
> see dead ends often. If we do, we can create a board that solves such
> conflicts - like the oversight board (not sure if it is the same board
> or if it has to be a different one).
> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
> IAEP at lists.sugarlabs.org
«Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar.
What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David
More information about the Sugar-devel