On 17 August 2016 at 21:11, Walter Bender <walter.ben...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Dave Crossland <d...@lab6.com> wrote: > >> >> On 17 August 2016 at 20:54, Walter Bender <walter.ben...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Dave Crossland <d...@lab6.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On 17 August 2016 at 20:41, Walter Bender <walter.ben...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I am of the opinion that SLOB does not have to approve individual >>>>> membership in committees. SLOB responsibility vis-a-vis committees is to >>>>> appoint a representative. So I don't think we need a motion. >>>> >>>> >>>> https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members doesn't specify a >>>> representative; nor could I find a reference to one in the logs I mentioned >>>> in my recent post. Was one appointed? >>>> >>> >>> I don't recall. Could be me :) >>> >> >> I suggest adding this to the next SLOB meeting agenda as a discussion >> point (and possible immediate motion :) >> > > +1 > >> >> This is a side issue though; the primary concerns of Caryl and myself >> that we would appreciate SLOB guidance on are >> >> - what criteria should be used to define who is and is not eligible to be >> counted as a Sugar Labs member? >> > > I agree with the "big tent" premise. We have a diverse project with many > parts. Contributions of all types are welcome and qualifying IMHO. Since we > also try to blur the line between users and contributors, I am also of the > opinion that a user who would like to be a member should be welcome. > Since it is libre software, anyone can be a user; thus you are proposing that anyone who self-asserts to become a voting member by emailing memb...@sugarlabs.org should be added to the membership list (which I propose is itself a mailman mailing list.) I'm fine with that, but is seems to be a change in policy. > - what criteria should be used to define what is and is not a Sugar Labs >> owned project? >> > > From 10000 feet, I'd say if it is FOSS and focused on learning, it can > qualify. But there also has to be an intention to have the project somehow > connected to the Sugar community. > Concretely, would each of these projects qualify? - Childsplay - Scratch - Squeak - Tux Math - Tux Paint - XSCE -- Cheers Dave
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep