On Mon, 4 Aug 2008, David Farning wrote: > I would like to apologize for my absence over the last weeks. I have > been trying to determine if Sugar is a viable project and if Sugar Labs > is a viable organization. > > For the weeks prior to my break, I have been working on community > outreach. Community outreach has meant contacting grassroots > organizations with an interest in technology and education. After > establishing contact, I start a discussion about about how establishing > a relationship between Sugar Labs and their organization can be > beneficial to both of us. > > On the plus side: > > 1. We have a working piece of software. We are lucky enough that OLPC > funded us long enough to create a functional system. The vast majority > of projects fail in the pre-alpha stage. > > 2. We have a core group of experienced developers. Over the past > several years OLPC has attracted a number of professional developers and > helpful community members to participate in the project. > > 3. There is a large public demand of our product. OLPC has proven that > on a large scale through their deployments. At a more local, there are > thousands or individuals who are interested in improving their local > school system. > > 4. Sugar Labs has a functional infrastructure on which we can build. > > On the negative side: > > 1. Lack of commitment. The main reason organizations have stated for > not becoming involved in Sugar Labs is our lack of commitment. There is > a significant fear that OLPC will withdraw their support.
That's not the sense I get here at 1CC. Can you tell me where this fear comes from? > 2. Lack of vision. The second reason organizations hesitate to become > involved with Sugar Labs is our lack of vision. There is a perception > that Sugar development has stalled. I agree that it's vital to get people who love Sugar together to articulate a strong vision. My take on that vision: making Sugar the archetypal interface for "sharing by default". > Moving forward: > > 1. Diversify our base of stakeholders. Currently, we have only two > public stakeholders: OLPC and Redhat. This number should be greater. Success is what brings more shareholders. > 2. Balance support and development resources. The single biggest issue > that we face is how to balance our resources between supporting existing > deployments and pushing development forward. > > My conclusions: > > 1. OLPC, Sugar, and Sugar Labs are worth pushing forward. While not the > greatest thing since sliced bread, OLPC and Sugar represent > technologies which can enhance learning for current and future > generations. > > It's a Learning Projects. :) --g _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
