Decision panels/SOAS - Revision history

FGrose at 03:41, 6 March 2011

2011-03-06T03:41:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:41, 5 March 2011
Line 9:		Line 9:
	==Mandate==		==Mandate==

	{{~~quote~~\|		{{Box\|
	:"Investigate the situation of how SoaS should be treated by Sugar Labs, and related questions, including answers to the following:		:"Investigate the situation of how SoaS should be treated by Sugar Labs, and related questions, including answers to the following:
	:* <nowiki>[Question 1]</nowiki> "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"		:* <nowiki>[Question 1]</nowiki> "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"
Line 51:		Line 51:
	In the [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|absence]] of a final report the Oversight board decided [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Question 1,]] [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|Question 2,]] and [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Resolve_outstanding_Sugar_on_a_Stick_decision_.28Q3.29\|Question 3]]:		In the [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|absence]] of a final report the Oversight board decided [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Question 1,]] [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|Question 2,]] and [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Resolve_outstanding_Sugar_on_a_Stick_decision_.28Q3.29\|Question 3]]:

	{{~~quote~~\|		{{Box\|
	:* <nowiki>[Question 1]</nowiki> "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"		:* <nowiki>[Question 1]</nowiki> "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"
	:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|No]]. 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.		:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|No]]. 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.

Sj: /* Conclusion */ adding clarification from the meeting minutes

2010-02-11T23:31:21Z

Conclusion: adding clarification from the meeting minutes

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 11 February 2010
Line 57:		Line 57:
	:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|No.]] SL may promote one distribution in its marketing campaign, but encourages all GNU/Linux distributions to package and distribute Sugar, and if possible will assist with hosting and infrastructure.		:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|No.]] SL may promote one distribution in its marketing campaign, but encourages all GNU/Linux distributions to package and distribute Sugar, and if possible will assist with hosting and infrastructure.
	:* <nowiki>[Question 3]</nowiki> "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?"		:* <nowiki>[Question 3]</nowiki> "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?"
	:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Resolve_outstanding_Sugar_on_a_Stick_decision_.28Q3.29\|Yes.]]		:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Resolve_outstanding_Sugar_on_a_Stick_decision_.28Q3.29\|Yes.]] "Sugar on a Stick" should be reserved by Sugar Labs for use by the SoaS-Fedora distribution so that Sugar can be marketed effectively, until such time when a trademark policy, agreement, and process is put in place: SoaS will be the first project to go through that process.
	:* Any other question the Decision Panel deems required to provide an answer to the original question:"Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution?"		:* Any other question the Decision Panel deems required to provide an answer to the original question:"Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution?"
	:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Sugar Labs' intent to promote Sugar as widely as possible]] means that SL will work with GNU/Linux distros to produce and offer downloadable versions. This work can include helping to promote distros, and hosting them.		:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Sugar Labs' intent to promote Sugar as widely as possible]] means that SL will work with GNU/Linux distros to produce and offer downloadable versions. This work can include helping to promote distros, and hosting them.

Sj: /* Conclusion */ adding clarification from the meeting minutes

2010-02-11T23:29:43Z

Conclusion: adding clarification from the meeting minutes

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:29, 11 February 2010
Line 53:		Line 53:
	{{quote\|		{{quote\|
	:* <nowiki>[Question 1]</nowiki> "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"		:* <nowiki>[Question 1]</nowiki> "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"
	:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|No]].		:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|No]]. 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.
	:* <nowiki>[Question 2]</nowiki> "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another?"		:* <nowiki>[Question 2]</nowiki> "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another?"
	:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|No.]] SL may promote one distribution in its marketing campaign, but encourages all GNU/Linux distributions to package and distribute Sugar, and if possible will assist with hosting and infrastructure.		:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|No.]] SL may promote one distribution in its marketing campaign, but encourages all GNU/Linux distributions to package and distribute Sugar, and if possible will assist with hosting and infrastructure.

MartinDengler: /* Conclusion */ remove extra pipe char

2010-02-05T17:04:32Z

Conclusion: remove extra pipe char

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:04, 5 February 2010
Line 49:		Line 49:
	== Conclusion ==		== Conclusion ==

	In the [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|absence]] of a final report the Oversight board decided [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Question 1,]] [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|Question 2,]] and [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Resolve_outstanding_Sugar_on_a_Stick_decision_.28Q3.29\|\|Question 3]]:		In the [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|absence]] of a final report the Oversight board decided [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Question 1,]] [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|Question 2,]] and [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Resolve_outstanding_Sugar_on_a_Stick_decision_.28Q3.29\|Question 3]]:

	{{quote\|		{{quote\|
Line 61:		Line 61:
	:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Sugar Labs' intent to promote Sugar as widely as possible]] means that SL will work with GNU/Linux distros to produce and offer downloadable versions. This work can include helping to promote distros, and hosting them.		:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Sugar Labs' intent to promote Sugar as widely as possible]] means that SL will work with GNU/Linux distros to produce and offer downloadable versions. This work can include helping to promote distros, and hosting them.
	}}		}}


	==Further ideas==		==Further ideas==

MartinDengler: add results of 2009-12 Oversight Board discussions

2010-02-05T17:00:41Z

add results of 2009-12 Oversight Board discussions

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:00, 5 February 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{draft}}~~

	{{TOCright2\|limit=2}}		{{TOCright2\|limit=2}}

	==~~Origin~~==		==Overview==

	A 12-person Sugar-on-a-Stick (SoaS) decision panel was appointed by a [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-09-25#Decision_Panel\|September 25, 2009]] Oversight Board decision.		A 12-person Sugar-on-a-Stick (SoaS) decision panel was appointed by a [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-09-25#Decision_Panel\|September 25, 2009]] Oversight Board decision.

			The Oversight Board requested a final report, but none was received [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|by 2009-12-04]]. The Oversight Board then assumed responsibility for deciding the mandated questions (ibid.). A summary [[#Conclusion\|is below]].

	==Mandate==		==Mandate==
Line 11:		Line 11:
	{{quote\|		{{quote\|
	:"Investigate the situation of how SoaS should be treated by Sugar Labs, and related questions, including answers to the following:		:"Investigate the situation of how SoaS should be treated by Sugar Labs, and related questions, including answers to the following:
	:* "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"		:* <nowiki>[Question 1]</nowiki> "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/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?"		:* <nowiki>[Question 2]</nowiki> "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 its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?"		:* <nowiki>[Question 3]</nowiki> "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?"
	:* Any other question the Decision Panel deems required to provide an answer to the original question:"Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution?"		:* Any other question the Decision Panel deems required to provide an answer to the original question:"Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution?"
	}}		}}
Line 45:		Line 45:

	{{:Decision panels/SOAS/Report}}		{{:Decision panels/SOAS/Report}}


			== Conclusion ==

			In the [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|absence]] of a final report the Oversight board decided [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Question 1,]] [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|Question 2,]] and [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Resolve_outstanding_Sugar_on_a_Stick_decision_.28Q3.29\|\|Question 3]]:

			{{quote\|
			:* <nowiki>[Question 1]</nowiki> "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"
			:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|No]].
			:* <nowiki>[Question 2]</nowiki> "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another?"
			:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Revisit_Motion_4_from_last_week\|No.]] SL may promote one distribution in its marketing campaign, but encourages all GNU/Linux distributions to package and distribute Sugar, and if possible will assist with hosting and infrastructure.
			:* <nowiki>[Question 3]</nowiki> "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?"
			:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-18#Resolve_outstanding_Sugar_on_a_Stick_decision_.28Q3.29\|Yes.]]
			:* Any other question the Decision Panel deems required to provide an answer to the original question:"Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution?"
			:** Answer: [[Oversight_Board/Meeting_Minutes-2009-12-11#SoaS_DP\|Sugar Labs' intent to promote Sugar as widely as possible]] means that SL will work with GNU/Linux distros to produce and offer downloadable versions. This work can include helping to promote distros, and hosting them.
			}}


	==Further ideas==		==Further ideas==

Sj: /* Further ideas */

2009-10-29T23:30:56Z

Further ideas

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:30, 29 October 2009
Line 48:		Line 48:
	==Further ideas==		==Further ideas==

	~~===Potential~~ naming conventions~~===~~		* discussion of potential naming conventions.
	* Sugar4CD/PC/F11 (Sugar, version 4, made for liveCD, runs on PCs, Fedora11 based) - example from Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho@hotmail.~~com>~~		* discussion of ''how'' to support products such as SOAS, and what that means
	* ~~There has been much talk~~ of ~~whether we should name with different foods and animals. Types of sugar (sucrose~~, ~~glucose) has been suggested due to its link to sustainability of life.~~		* exploration of what it means to "produce a distribution", which some active contributors felt was a huge effort and others felt was already being done, with most effort happening upstream. Better agreement within the community about what is being done may help avoid distracting meta-debates about direction.
	~~There still seems to be much sense in keeping it simple with SoaS keeping one name with a version release number~~ and ~~corresponding release name.~~
	* ~~Perhaps including the type~~ of ~~media in the name could be helpful, but with~~ "~~sugar~~" ~~themes. For example SD versions could be "Sugar Cookies~~,~~" Live CD versions could be "Sugar Pies~~.~~" That would make~~ the ~~above example "SugarPie4/PC/F11"(also from Caryl Bigenho)~~


	[[category:decision panels]]		[[category:decision panels]]

Sj: ..

2009-10-09T01:21:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:21, 8 October 2009
Line 44:		Line 44:
	== Report ==		== Report ==

	{{Decision panels/SOAS/Report}}		{{:Decision panels/SOAS/Report}}


	==Further ideas==		==Further ideas==

Sj: separate report page

2009-10-09T01:21:37Z

separate report page

Show changes

Sj: /* Report on Questions 1-3 */ table

2009-10-09T01:19:50Z

Report on Questions 1-3: table

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:19, 8 October 2009
Line 122:		Line 122:
	'''Proposed answers:'''		'''Proposed answers:'''

	{\| border="1"		{\| border="1" class="wikitable"
	!Yes		!width=25%\| Yes
	!No		!width=25%\| No
	!Invalid		!width=25%\| Invalid
	!~~Abstain~~		! Undecided
	\|-		\|-
	\|		\|
Line 149:		Line 149:

	{\| border="1"		{\| border="1"
	!Yes		!width=25%\| Yes
	!No		!width=25%\| No
	!Invalid		!width=25%\| Invalid
	!Undecided		! Undecided
	\|-		\|-
	\|		\|
Line 172:		Line 172:

	{\| border="1"		{\| border="1"
	!Yes		!width=25%\| Yes
	!No		!width=25%\| No
	!Invalid		!width=25%\| Invalid
	!Undecided		! Undecided
	\|-		\|-
	\|		\|
	# Yes. Sugar on a Stick is the central pillar of our marketing strategy [http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/soas/2009-September/000048.html (reference)]. It's not trademarked, but should be [http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/soas/2009-September/000045.html (reference)]. SL does not want to confuse its users and a light touch like this is all that's needed [http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-September/008403.html (reference)]		# Yes. Sugar on a Stick is the central pillar of our marketing strategy [http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/soas/2009-September/000048.html (reference)]. It's not trademarked, but should be [http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/soas/2009-September/000045.html (reference)]. SL does not want to confuse its users and a light touch like this is all that's needed [http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-September/008403.html (reference)]
	\|		\|
	#		# No.
	\|		\|
	# Invalid question. An answer to this question is not needed for Sugar Labs' members to get on with their work, and the results from a decision panel will not have any effect [http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-September/008751.html ref].		# Invalid question. An answer to this question is not needed for Sugar Labs' members to get on with their work, and the results from a decision panel will not have any effect [http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/2009-September/008751.html ref].

Sj: /* Report on Questions 1-3 */ prpoed answers

2009-10-09T01:14:13Z

Report on Questions 1-3: prpoed answers

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:14, 8 October 2009
Line 120:		Line 120:
	Question 1: "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"		Question 1: "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?"

	~~Answer~~:		'''Proposed answers:'''


	{\| border="1"		{\| border="1"
Line 146:		Line 145:
	Question 2: "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another?"		Question 2: "Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another?"

	~~Answer~~:		'''Proposed answers:'''


	{\| border="1"		{\| border="1"
Line 169:		Line 169:
	Question 3: "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?"		Question 3: "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?"

	~~Answer~~:		'''Proposed answers:'''


	{\| border="1"		{\| border="1"