Difference between revisions of "Oversight Board/2009/Meeting Minutes-2009-12-11"
m (moved Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-12-11 to Walter is a wanker 13/Meeting Minutes-2009-12-11: Walter is a wanker) |
m (moved Oversight Board/Meeting Minutes-2009-12-11 to Oversight Board/2009/Meeting Minutes-2009-12-11) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
== Log == | == Log == | ||
| − | [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Log-2009-12-11|Meeting Log]] | + | [[Oversight_Board/2009/Meeting_Log-2009-12-11|Meeting Log]] |
[[Category:Oversight board]] | [[Category:Oversight board]] | ||
| − | |||
[[Category:Meeting minutes]] | [[Category:Meeting minutes]] | ||
[[Category:Decision panels]] | [[Category:Decision panels]] | ||
Latest revision as of 22:50, 1 March 2011
In attendance:
SLOB members: walter, tomeu, cjb. SeanDaly, mchua, Canoeberry, bernie
Some community members (including alsroot) attended the meeting.
Agenda
- Non-FOSS content
- SoaS DP
- Trademark policy
Non-FOSS content
MOTION 1: adopt http://opensource.org/docs/osd as a set of guidelines for what is permitted on ASLO, for both software and content, and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses's opinions on specific licenses where applicable, and always asking the SFC for advice when a particular license is under question.
Motion passes (6 for; 0 against; 1 abstain)
ACTION: Walter will inform the community
ACTION: Alsroot will update ASLO policy pages
SoaS DP
We praised the work done by the SoaS DP even though they did not submit a final report to the oversight board by its deadline. We discussed Q1 and Q2. (Q3 will be discussed at the next meeting.)
MOTION 2: Question 1: Yes, SL is and should be a GNU/Linux distributor.
Motion failed (3 for; 3 against; 1 abstain)
MOTION 3: SL wishes to spread the use of Sugar and consequently works with GNU/Linux distros to produce and offer downloadable versions. This work can include helping to promote distros, and hosting them.
Motion passed (6 for; 0 against; 1 abstain)
MOTION 4: "Question 2: SL should not be completely neutral about promoting distros, but it should only choose to more strongly promote a distro based on technical merit and maintainer activity, and should publish the criteria it uses for making that decision. Furthermore, SL should be neutral about providing infrastructure resources (hosting, etc) to distros."
Motion passed (4 for; 1 against; 1 abstain; 1 vote yet to be counted)
An amendment to Motion 4 has been proposed (in email, quoted below) and will be discussed at the next meeting.
- "Sugar Labs encourages all GNU/Linux distributions to package and distribute Sugar, and if possible will assist with hosting and infrastructure. SL Marketing may strategically decide to focus resources towards specific distributions in the interest of promoting Sugar more effectively."
Trademark policy
To be continued next time.
Next meeting
Friday, 18 December 2009 15:00 UTC