Decision panels/SOAS/Report: Difference between revisions
top |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
;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: Consensus trending towards ''yes''. There has been some discussion about what is involved in 'being a GNU/Linux distributor' and what the risks and benefits would be; specifics have been suggested but not clearly enumerated, making consensus building harder. [[#Question_1|TBD - see below for opinions]] | ;Answer: Consensus trending towards '''yes'''. There has been some discussion about what is involved in 'being a GNU/Linux distributor' and what the risks and benefits would be; specifics have been suggested but not clearly enumerated, making consensus building harder. [[#Question_1|TBD - see below for opinions]] | ||
;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: Consensus | ;Answer: Consensus is '''yes'''. There are requests for clarification of how SL can promote effective ways of distributing Sugar, and endorse all good distributions. [[#Question_2|TBD - see below for opinions]] | ||
;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?" | ||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
===Mandate=== | ===Mandate=== | ||
{{ | {{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: | ||
:* "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?" | :* "Should Sugar Labs be a GNU/Linux distributor, rather than just an upstream producing Sugar releases?" | ||
| Line 139: | Line 139: | ||
|} | |} | ||
===Conclusion=== | === DP Conclusion=== | ||
''to come'' | ''to come'' | ||
===Appendices=== | ===Appendices=== | ||
| Line 200: | Line 199: | ||
| valign="top"| <!-- invalid question --> | | valign="top"| <!-- invalid question --> | ||
| valign="top"| <!-- defer --> | | valign="top"| <!-- defer --> | ||
Samuel Klein - <small>SL should support effective distros; this can be done neutrally. </small> | |||
| valign="top"| <!-- undecided --> | | valign="top"| <!-- undecided --> | ||
Bill Bogstad, Faisal Khan, Daniel Drake | Bill Bogstad, Faisal Khan, Daniel Drake | ||
|- | |- | ||
|colspan=5| | |colspan=5| | ||
=====Question 3===== | =====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?" | "Should 'Sugar on a Stick' be a phrase that SL asks its community to avoid using unless they refer to the SoaS-Fedora distribution?" | ||