[Sugar-devel] [IAEP] [SLOBS] SLOBs Position on SoaS

[Tomeu Vizoso]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 17:11, Sebastian Dziallas <sebastian at when.com> wrote:
> Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 16:24, Daniel Drake<dsd at laptop.org>  wrote:
>>>
>>> 2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas<sebastian at when.com>:
>>>>
>>>> Let me rephrase again, to make things clear. I'd love to hear an
>>>> "official" answer on this. Soon.
>>>>
>>>> Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a
>>>> Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution?
>>>
>>> Isn't there a wider question first? the one that asks if Sugar Labs is
>>> actually interested in being a distributor rather than just an
>>> upstream. I raised that question in my recent discussion and my
>>> feeling is that the responses basically said "well we should really
>>> just focus on being an upstream since we already are overworked there,
>>> but actually Sugar Labs is just a platform where everyone interested
>>> in Sugar can get together and run Sugar-related projects"
>>>
>>> Based on that, I'd say that SoaS is a fine project to sit under Sugar
>>> Labs but there shouldn't be a "primary way" of getting Sugar. Like
>>> other upstream projects, Sugar Labs should work with multiple
>>> downstreams (treating them equally) in order to achieve wide adoption
>>> of the software.
>>
>> That matches quite well my personal point of view. I'm just a bit
>> concerned that the marketing team might need something like SoaS as
>> part of their job to make Sugar widely known. But I'm just guessing
>> here...
>>
>> That said, SoaS is very important for me as an upstream Sugar
>> developer because before we had it, people had to install a linux
>> distro or get an XO to try or test Sugar. So I have a big interest in
>> that SoaS work continue forward, in SLs if needed.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Tomeu
>
> Args! I notice that what I asked could have been misunderstood. I didn't
> mean to imply SoaS being only way of distributing Sugar. That's out of
> question and was never my intention. I apologize for any confusion if this
> feeling has been created.
>
> I wonder, though, if the current SoaS is going to be the primary LiveUSB
> distribution of Sugar supported by upstream (known as SoaS).
>
> Daniel, yes, I think this question needs to be asked. In fact, it has been
> asked. You mentioned it. Martin Dengler has pointed it out very clearly on
> IAEP just a day ago (while receiving no replies). I felt that this one
> question I asked implied it, but you're right.
>
> Tomeu, I agree, too. SoaS has started gaining foothold with it's (imo) very
> successful v1 launch. Now we need to continue following the path. The
> question is just where.

About where, I personally think that SoaS is very important for SLs
and I would like to make sure that you have the best environment on
which continue the work. Whether that means as a Fedora or SLs
project, I don't know. What do you think would be best?

Regards,

Tomeu

-- 
«Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar.
What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David
Farning