[Sugar-devel] Sugar all-hands meeting

[Tony Anderson]

+1

On 05/26/2015 09:29 PM, Samuel Greenfeld wrote:
> Looking at past minutes, I think I am proposing more of a change in 
> procedure than topics for the oversight meeting.  We need to get more 
> people involved than are present in the IRC meetings.
>
> In general I am echoing what was said on the "Planning for the Future" 
> email thread from three months ago.
>
> But some topics (for the oversight meeting or an all-hands meeting) 
> would be:
>
>  1. What can Sugar publicly commit to having in terms of
>     users/developers/finances/etc. beyond what was mentioned in the
>     deployment survey.
>
>     Witness Dan's complaints over the 3 million number, James noting
>     no one filed a bug report for Sugar 0.105.1 yet, the lack of
>     candidates for past elections, the lack of interaction between the
>     XS development and Sugar development communities, etc.
>
>     It also would be useful to know what users/developers/etc. could
>     publicly commit to Sugar.
>
>
>  2. What is being done to address the main issues raised by
>     deployments in the latest development survey.
>
>
>  3. A complete holistic overhaul of how releases are done and
>     marketed.  Sugar was originally created with a "if you build it,
>     they will come" approach that many community members have at least
>     privately complained about.
>
>     We need real-world examples of how to integrate Sugar with
>     curriculums, reference deployments willing to speak with
>     prospective ones, etc.
>
>     Setting up Sugar needs to be no harder than a child using it for
>     the first time.
>
>
>  4. What is being done to attract new deployments, developers (besides
>     GSoC) and project sponsors.
>
>
>  5. I would like to propose a "Sugar Ambassador" program similar to
>     the Fedora one where less-technical members of the community could
>     engage with other groups to figure out what they would need to use
>     Sugar.  This does not necessarily mean that we need to fly them
>     everywhere; but it would give us a good idea of what might be
>     required to obtain gain certain types of deployments.
>
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Walter Bender 
> <walter.bender at gmail.com <mailto:walter.bender at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     The next Sugar Labs oversight board meeting is on Monday. Anyone
>     in the community is, as always, welcome to suggest discussion topics.
>
>     -walter
>
>     On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Samuel Greenfeld
>     <samuel at greenfeld.org <mailto:samuel at greenfeld.org>> wrote:
>
>         I know there have been various board and development meetings
>         for Sugar.
>
>         But I would like to propose having an "all-hands" meeting
>         where anyone in the Sugar community as well as related groups
>         (deployments, schoolserver, etc.) could raise a topic and attend.
>
>         If there are few enough people, we might be able to do this
>         with a Google Hangout.  For larger crowds we should try to get
>         permission to use an international conference bridge (to avoid
>         a dozen echo cancelers getting confused by each other).
>
>         There are a lot of things that need to be done that I suspect
>         could happen given a wider audience.
>
>         ---
>         SJG
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Sugar-devel mailing list
>         Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>         <mailto:Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org>
>         http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Walter Bender
>     Sugar Labs
>     http://www.sugarlabs.org
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20150526/3113fcaf/attachment.html>