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

[Mathieu Bridon (bochecha)]

> I admit to having some difficulties understanding why you would want to keep
> Sugar as an upstream only.  Perhaps the arguments have already been made.
> I'm a late comer to the list so I am certainly unaware of what's been
> discussed prior to my joining in July. If so could someone please give me a
> pointer? Or a recap?

Creating and maintaining a full distro is hard and time consuming.

SL has limited resources.

If SL was an upstream-only project, SL could thus focus on doing what
only them can do (developing Sugar) while letting the distributors do
what they know best and are already doing anyway (integrating the
developers' work into a product and distributing it).

Of course, distributors can include people from SL (helps on
integrating the developments properly into the distribution), and
distributors can help SL doing development (fixing issues that only
appear when building RPMs for example). The issue is not about the
individuals doing work, rather about the projects defining their own
responsibilities.

And remember, we (in Fedora and other distributions) are *already*
integrating Sugar in our product (the distribution). SL really doesn't
*need* to do this once again.

Best regards,


----------

Mathieu Bridon (bochecha)