Difference between revisions of "Decision panels/SOAS"

From Sugar Labs
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
Line 30: Line 30:
 
[[category:decision panels]]
 
[[category:decision panels]]
  
===Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases? ===
+
<b>Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?</b>
  
===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? ===
 
  
===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? ===
+
<b>Should SL be neutral about distributions containing Sugar, and refuse to endorse one over another? </b>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<b>Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution? </b>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<b>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? </b>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<b>Potential naming conventions: </b>
 +
* Sugar4CD/PC/F11 (Sugar, version 4, made for liveCD, runs on PCs, Fedora11 based) - example from Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho@hotmail.com>

Revision as of 03:52, 30 September 2009

A 12-person SOAS decision panel was appointed by a September, 2009 Oversight Board decision.

Mandate

Template:Quote

Members

  • Sebastian Dziallas
  • Luke Faraone
  • Martin Dengler
  • Bill Bogstad
  • Faisal Khan
  • Benjamin M. Schwartz
  • Samuel Klein
  • Sean Daly
  • Tabitha Roder
  • Caryl Bigenho
  • Daniel Drake
  • Abhishek Indoria


Process

The process for discussion and reaching a decision is not yet set.

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?


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?


Potential naming conventions:

  • Sugar4CD/PC/F11 (Sugar, version 4, made for liveCD, runs on PCs, Fedora11 based) - example from Caryl Bigenho <cbigenho@hotmail.com>