On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 17:11, Sebastian Dziallas <[email protected]> wrote: > Tomeu Vizoso wrote: >> >> On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 16:24, Daniel Drake<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> 2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas<[email protected]>: >>>> >>>> Let me rephrase again, to make things clear. I'd love to hear an >>>> "official" answer on this. Soon. >>>> >>>> Is the current SoaS going to be the primary way Sugar Labs distributes a >>>> Sugar-centric GNU/Linux distribution? >>> >>> Isn't there a wider question first? the one that asks if Sugar Labs is >>> actually interested in being a distributor rather than just an >>> upstream. I raised that question in my recent discussion and my >>> feeling is that the responses basically said "well we should really >>> just focus on being an upstream since we already are overworked there, >>> but actually Sugar Labs is just a platform where everyone interested >>> in Sugar can get together and run Sugar-related projects" >>> >>> Based on that, I'd say that SoaS is a fine project to sit under Sugar >>> Labs but there shouldn't be a "primary way" of getting Sugar. Like >>> other upstream projects, Sugar Labs should work with multiple >>> downstreams (treating them equally) in order to achieve wide adoption >>> of the software. >> >> That matches quite well my personal point of view. I'm just a bit >> concerned that the marketing team might need something like SoaS as >> part of their job to make Sugar widely known. But I'm just guessing >> here... >> >> That said, SoaS is very important for me as an upstream Sugar >> developer because before we had it, people had to install a linux >> distro or get an XO to try or test Sugar. So I have a big interest in >> that SoaS work continue forward, in SLs if needed. >> >> Regards, >> >> Tomeu > > Args! I notice that what I asked could have been misunderstood. I didn't > mean to imply SoaS being only way of distributing Sugar. That's out of > question and was never my intention. I apologize for any confusion if this > feeling has been created. > > I wonder, though, if the current SoaS is going to be the primary LiveUSB > distribution of Sugar supported by upstream (known as SoaS). > > Daniel, yes, I think this question needs to be asked. In fact, it has been > asked. You mentioned it. Martin Dengler has pointed it out very clearly on > IAEP just a day ago (while receiving no replies). I felt that this one > question I asked implied it, but you're right. > > Tomeu, I agree, too. SoaS has started gaining foothold with it's (imo) very > successful v1 launch. Now we need to continue following the path. The > question is just where.
About where, I personally think that SoaS is very important for SLs and I would like to make sure that you have the best environment on which continue the work. Whether that means as a Fedora or SLs project, I don't know. What do you think would be best? Regards, Tomeu -- «Sugar Labs is anyone who participates in improving and using Sugar. What Sugar Labs does is determined by the participants.» - David Farning _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
