Decision panels/SOAS: Difference between revisions
m →Question 3: remove dupe of abishek indoria in undecided section |
unresolved. |
||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
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: No, not now. SL is not now a full-service GNU/Linux distributor but 1) many contributors volunteer to help with individual tasks thereof; and 2) an official plan is part of a number of SugarLabs' members plans. | Answer: ''unresolved'' | ||
<!-- No, not now. SL is not now a full-service GNU/Linux distributor but 1) many contributors volunteer to help with individual tasks thereof; and 2) an official plan is part of a number of SugarLabs' members plans. --> | |||
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: No. Sugar On a Stick, the Fedora-derived distribution, will be the endorsed distribution. | Answer: ''unresolved'' | ||
<!-- No. Sugar On a Stick, the Fedora-derived distribution, will be the endorsed 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?" | 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: Yes. | Answer: ''unresolved'' | ||
<!-- Yes. --> | |||
| Line 112: | Line 115: | ||
===Report on Questions 1-3=== | ===Report on Questions 1-3=== | ||
These questions have not been resolved yet; a minority of panel members have weighted in so far. 05:29, 8 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
====Question 1==== | ====Question 1==== | ||
| Line 119: | Line 122: | ||
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: | Answer: | ||
====Question 2==== | ====Question 2==== | ||
| Line 127: | Line 129: | ||
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: | Answer: | ||
====Question 3==== | ====Question 3==== | ||
| Line 135: | Line 136: | ||
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: | Answer: | ||