On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 03:28:11PM -0400, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>> 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/L
2009/9/19 Chris Ball :
> "Should Sugar Labs be a Linux distributor, rather than just an
> upstream producing Sugar releases?"
>
> "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and
> refuse to endorse one over another?"
>
> "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 18:58, Daniel Drake wrote:
> 2009/9/16 Tomeu Vizoso :
>> I cannot speak for Sebastian nor the whole SoaS community, but
>> something like making SoaS an official project in SLs could go a long
>> way. This would mean saying that "Sugar on a Stick" is a project with
>> this
2009/9/16 Tomeu Vizoso :
> I cannot speak for Sebastian nor the whole SoaS community, but
> something like making SoaS an official project in SLs could go a long
> way. This would mean saying that "Sugar on a Stick" is a project with
> this vision, this mission, this roadmap, this governance model,
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 18:37, Daniel Drake wrote:
> 2009/9/16 Tomeu Vizoso :
>> That's true for SoaS, Sugar and for any other FOSS project, but I
>> think it's a reasonable request to ask for some explicit commitment
>> from the umbrella organization, just to not have to switch orgs every
>> rele
2009/9/16 Tomeu Vizoso :
> That's true for SoaS, Sugar and for any other FOSS project, but I
> think it's a reasonable request to ask for some explicit commitment
> from the umbrella organization, just to not have to switch orgs every
> release.
What kind of commitment do you have in mind?
___
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 18:20, Daniel Drake wrote:
> 2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas :
>> Now it comes to what I think is important in a project. And that is - also -
>> certainty and trust. Those are pretty important factors. For developers, as
>> well as for users, to know where one stands.
>
> Per
On 2009-09-16, Daniel Drake wrote:
>
> 2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas :
> > I wonder, though, if the current SoaS is going to be the primary LiveUSB
> > distribution of Sugar supported by upstream (known as SoaS).
> I think Sugar should treat all downstreams equally, so there would be
> no primary d
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009, Daniel Drake wrote:
>> I wonder, though, if the current SoaS is going to be the primary
>> LiveUSB distribution of Sugar supported by upstream (known as SoaS).
>
> I think Sugar should treat all downstreams equally, so there would be no
> primary distro. But users/deployment
2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas :
> 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 don't think
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 17:11, Sebastian Dziallas wrote:
> Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 16:24, Daniel Drake wrote:
>>>
>>> 2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas:
Let me rephrase again, to make things clear. I'd love to hear an
"official" answer on this. Soon.
Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 16:24, Daniel Drake wrote:
>> 2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas:
>>> 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
>>> S
12 matches
Mail list logo
