Oversight Board/Decisions

This page (largely complete) is intended to be a one-stop place for reviewing all of the Sugar Labs oversight board (SLOB) actions and decisions.

2016-05-06

PENDING: To pay for laboratoriosazucar.org domain registration renewal
POSTPONED: To appoint a Finance Manager (while scheduled for this SLOB meeting, the draft for the motion is still under development.)
PENDING: To fund a program to initiate the translation of Sugar into Yoruba. The specific milestones and costs are detailed below. A description of the rationale for the project is found at [2]. The work would be led by Samson Goddy and reviewed by Chris Leonard, in his role as Translation Community Manager.
PENDING: To update the Sugar License from GPLv2 to GPLv3
PENDING: To allow the mentors participating in Google Summer of Code to disperse the mentor stipend among themselves as they see fit.
PENDING: To adopt the wiki Vision proposal for 2016

2016-04-09

AGREED: To offer Devin U. an honorarium ($500) to compensate him since he needed to take a week off from work to run two Turtle/Music Blocks workshops at the Constructionism Conference. The funds would be allocated from the Trip Advisor grant which are in support of promoting and advancing Turtle Blocks around the world. (Vote taken by email.)
AGREED: Walter, as PI of the Trip Advisor grant, will inform the SL oversight board of his plans for workshops that fall under the guise promotion of Turtle Blocks but otherwise has discretion in organizing and funding these events, within the budget constraints of grant and the travel guidelines of the SFC. (Vote taken by email.)

2016-04-06

AGREED: To approve the position of Translation-Community Manager as described at Translation-Community Manager.
AGREED: That Chris Leonard be named to this position effective immediately.
AGREED: That the Translation-Community Manager be paid a stipend of $1000/month.

2016-04-01

AGREED: In keeping with the board 2010's decision on this matter from a different era, it was suggest that if a Board Member (1) fails to vote and attend pre-scheduled Board meetings for more than 12 weeks, (2) resigns or (3) dies, then the Board is empowered and encouraged to appoint a replacement for this seat. Finally, just a clarification that the Replacement Board Member would be required to defend their seat during the very next election.

2016-03-04

AGREED: Based on Translation Proposal, Tony (and other SLOB members) should write up a job description with goals and reporting structure for a coordinator position to be submitted to the SFC.
AGREED: Restrict email voting to 1 week going forward, to remove confusion from the current voting process, keeping focus. Board members' email votes would be required to arrive within One Week Maximum (168.0 hours) of the original motion. (Any motion that fails to pass within this 1-week sunset period, can of course be attempted again in future, e.g. if long-term overseas/off-grid/medical absences require another later vote on the same topic).

2016-02-12

AGREED: Moving regular SLOB meeting dates to the first Friday of the month at 16UTC
AGREED: Apply for GSoC 2016 (Lionel and Walter as co-admins)

2015-12-17

MOTION FAILED (3 In Favor, 4 Abstentions): to pay Devin Ulibarri $500 for help organize and run the Turtle workshop in Bangkok

(See renewed motion passed on 2016-04-09.)

2015-10-12

AGREED: Apply to GCI

2015-09-14

AGREED: funding to file an affidavits required to maintain the registration of Sugar Labs' trademarks with the USPTO.
ACTION: Walter to recruit mentors for GCI

2015-07-06

ACTION: acknowledged the numerous contributions to Sugar from the late Marco Presenti Gritti.

2015-05-06

AGREED: via email to add Samson Goody to the Membership Committee (DONE)

2015-05-04

AGREED: to share survey results with community (DONE)
ACTION: Gonzalo to post results (DONE)
ACTION: Gonzalo to write to each of the respondents
AGREED: that Claudia and Walter go to NI to discuss Sugar/OLPC future with the Zamoras
ACTION: Walter to make a first pass at culling the decisions from past meetings into one page (this page)

2015-04-06

AGREED: appoint Icarito and Caryl to the election committee and to try to recruit a youth member to the committee.

2015-01-14

ACTION: organize a summit to discuss the future of Sugar
ACTION: do a survey to solicit feedback from deployments

2014-10-07

ACTION: Recruit mentors for GCI
ACTION: Recruit candidates for oversight board

2014-07-08

AGREED: on a .UY venue for a summit in September 2014. Jose Miguel and Daniel will get back to us about specifics.

2014-03-03

ACTION: everyone solicit students for GSoC

2014-02-05

AGREED: to Gonzalo and Manuq's proposal for Background Image Contest

2013-11-04

AGREED: Luke to run election for oversight board again
AGREED: to give cjl discretion over the i18n funds in the Trip Advisor grant

2013-10-18

AGREED: we would apply again to Google Code In

2013-03-21

AGREED: the next release will be Sugar 1.0

2013-02-25

AGREED: to establish a category for Sugar Labs advisors/educators/friends
ACTION: Claudia and Walter will meet to start planning Turtle Art Day
AGREED: to apply for Google Summer of Code 2013

2013-01-07

ACTION: ClaudiaU agreed to share Making Learning Visible with SLOB members (and Tonyf and JT4Sugar)

2012-05-30

AGREED: to modify the Trademark and Local Labs pages in the wiki (See TM Policy and Local Labs Policy)

2012-05-03

AGREED: We approved a budget of up to US $5000 for two servers.
AGREED: Sugar Labs joins the SFC GPL enforcement program
ACTION: Walter to bring code-of-conduct discussion to the community.
ACTION: SLOB members to get signed agreements to the SFC regarding new SFC by-laws.

2011-12-02

AGREED: The Sugar Labs Oversight Board thanked Bernie Innocenti and Mel Chua for their dedicated service to the community in their role as members of the oversight board.

2011-09-16

AGREED: to keep the GSoC 2010 mentor funds as our general funds.

2011-08-05

AGREED: to award Sugar participation certificates (See Certificate Program).
AGREED: to give North Dakota State University authority to establish a local Sugar Lab.

2011-06-09

AGREED: we endorse Free Softeware as defined here: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

2011-05-08

AGREED: Bernie (head of infrastructure team) is authorized to approve spending tickets filed on the bug tracker up to $200.
AGREED: to update the governance page.

2011-02-10

AGREED: SL endorses the idea that community members have kids: means more Sugar hackers in the future !!
AGREED: Local labs can issue Sugar certificates (and charge for this service whatever they want) but only if: (1) they maintain a page on our wiki explaining what content they use for training, where to download it, and what pricing they use; and (2) all the content they use for training is licensed under one of the licenses recommend by http://opensource.org/docs/osd and/or http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/[…]ing#Good_Licenses.

2010-12-13

AGREED: Oversight_Board/Project_Motion
AGREED: SL would like to acknowledge and celebrate the marriage of acaire11 and icarito : the first Sugar marriage!!!

2010-12-01

AGREED: Each active team and local lab should propose a few delegates from that team to SLOBs. We will invite the delegates to SLOBs meetings, and rotate scheduled times during SLOBs meetings to hear reports from their team or lab.
AGREED: The default time/day of the week for SLOBs meetings will be Thursdays at 15:00 EST (20:00 UTC)
AGREED: If a SLOB member misses one month of regular weekly meetings in a row, twice during one calendar year, SLOBs may find a replacement for their seat.

2010-09-28

AGREED: We, the SLOB, acknowledge and praise the efforts of the release team for bringing us 0.90!!

2010-05-07

AGREED: to a Trademark policy.

2010-03-05

AGREED: (1) Bundles with non-Sugar dependencies be clearly marked in ASLO; (2) We work towards a mechanism for supporting access to non-Sugar dependencies--a specific endorsement of being open; and (3) We do not restrict ASLO while we progress towards #2.

2010-02-26

AGREED: to authorize Bernie to spec out a machine around $2000, send details to systems@ for review, decide exactly where it will be hosted, then buy it.

2010-01-22

AGREED: to authorize Luke Faraone to ship some used hardware from the Wikipedia Foundation (12 servers) to various hosting sites. The cost should not exceed US$300.

2009-12-18

AGREED: 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.
AGREED: 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.

2009-12-11

AGREED: to 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.
AGREED: SL is and should be a GNU/Linux distributor.
AGREED: 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.
AGREED: 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."

2009-12-04

AGREED: when a DP fails to meet a deadline, the decision passes to SLOBs.

2009-11-20

AGREED: Close the slobs@ list to just SLOBs, move current slobs@ traffic to iaep@ with a [SLOBS] subject line tag where at all possible.
AGREED: Give a two-week deadline to the Soas DP

2009-09-25

AGREED: We appointed a decision panel (by a vote of 3 for, 0 against, 1 abstain, 3 absent) with the following mandate:; "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 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?"

2008-09-05

AGREED: The Oversight Board acknowledged and celebrated the great job Simon has been doing on managing the 0.82 release.

2009-07-18

AGREED: There was consensus that we have made sufficient outreach to the community that the initial list is a fair representation of Sugar Labs; we look forward to having the Membership Committee take it from http://selectricity.org/
AGREED: There was consensus that Walter would put together a strawman election process based upon the Selectricity tool. We are targeting an August election.
AGREED: There was consensus that we begin with just Oversight and Members committees.
AGREED: We agreed for the need to solicit more feedback in the wiki for the design direction being proposed by Luca.
AGREED: We agreed that further discussions with the SFLA about the merits of trademark protection is needed.
AGREED: We agreed on the desirability of Sugar Labs participation at conferences around the world, but hope to meet the need by utilizing locals to whatever extent possible. We also discussed the desirability to have a meeting of Sugar Labs developers a couple of times per year. We discussed the possibility of an on-line meeting that leverages resources above and beyond IRC.
AGREED: on the necessity of Sugar Labs participation in the learning community, but don't yet have a good handle on the best and most efficient means of accomplishing this.