Sugar Labs

Changes

Decision panels/SOAS (view source)

Revision as of 04:00, 8 October 2009

108 bytes added ,  04:00, 8 October 2009
Undo revision 38949 by Sj (Talk)
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: ''unresolved''
+
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.
−
<!-- 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: ''unresolved''
+
Answer: No.  Sugar On a Stick, the Fedora-derived distribution, will be the endorsed distribution.
−
<!-- 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: ''unresolved''
+
Answer: Yes.
−
<!-- Yes. -->
        Line 115: Line 112:     
===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 122: Line 119:  
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: 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====
 
====Question 2====
Line 129: Line 127:  
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: No. Sugar On a Stick, the Fedora-derived distribution, will be the endorsed distribution.
 +
 
    
====Question 3====
 
====Question 3====
Line 136: Line 135:  
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: Yes.
 +
 
     
MartinDengler
243

edits

Retrieved from "https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Special:MobileDiff/38953"