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

[Philippe Clérié]

I'll take that as a first approximation. Resources are always limited.

On the other hand, perhaps someone should tell Caroline Meeks: she's out to 
conquer the world. :-) Her ambitions are not limited by the resources 
available.

-- 


Philippe

------
The trouble with common sense is that it is so uncommon.
<Anonymous>

On Wednesday 16 September 2009 15:18:57 Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) wrote:
> > 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)
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>