Bernie Innocenti wrote:
<snip>
On the other hand, if you'd ask me: "should Sugar Labs be promoting ONLY
(or mainly) SoaS?"... I don't know anyone who would say "yes". We've
welcomed any hardware and OS vendor who would distribute Sugar, and
tried to treat them equally: http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Downloads .
Uh, here I might have something to contribute because I was badly
misinformed on SLs goings-on for quite a while, having tried to give my
life some order by unsubscribing to as many lists as I could. You can
see I gave up :-)
Anyway, as a muggle or someone with little information (a.k.a. the
public) I actually thought, could say was sure, eve, that Sugarlabs was
pushing SOaS as their flagship product, maybe SugarLive was there around
somewhere, or course (?!?!) Sugar for the XO, whose status seems so
unclear... Being "better informed that most" I knew that SOaS ran on
top of Fedora, like the XO Sugar did, so no surprises, but that's it
AFAIK. I was glad people kept an eye on Ubuntu (my distro of choice),
and there's been some enthusiasm around Xtra something going on last
week in OLPCNews, and SD card based distro.
So that's the "ignorant" view
I was about to suggest this:
Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
So, a possible solution could be calling the product marketed by SLs
"Sugar on a Stick" and each individual team and product "Fedora Sugar
on a Stick", "OpenSUSE Sugar on a Stick", etc. From time to time SLs
would decide to call and market as "Sugar on a Stick" a particular
release of a particular flavor. This decision process should be very
transparent and fair, of course.
and I am so glad it was Tomeu who did it, for his voice has much more
meaning in this community.
I dare to speak only because I have the delusion might have earned my
spurs a long time ago, even though I hung them on the wall way too long
of late.
Because of my ignorant ways in interpreting things, which I trust is
also the way of the populace :-), I think the wisest thing is to keep
the SOaS moniker as a basic SLs thing, of course, of course recognizing
Sebastian. I mean, because he sort of "owns" SOaS", I would say he sort
of owns SLs itself, in a way (at least, much more than people like I)
Anyway, I'd say someone should register SOaSFedora.org and such others
as make sense, to avoid squatters, and to also have a way to display in
its fullness the different projects, which, different they may be, I
hope they don't see themselves as "independent". We are as one, and
either we hang together or we will hang alone, etc.
and, as Daniel says
Daniel Drake wrote:
2009/9/19 Yamandu Ploskonka <yamap...@gmail.com>:
sugaronastick.com is Caroline Meeks, so I believe we are OK there
as to the .org, it would be a certain Peter Robinson (?)
Read the "about" page. It's clearly intended as something separate
from SoaS, specifically a modification of it.
So, if you go to sugaronastick.com and click download then you would
get something different from the one that you get from the sugarlabs
wiki.
Well, I must admit I hadn't but, I will read that.
However, I was certain yesterday, and so I am today, that Caroline would
never act as a "squatter", at the very worst she will allow nice links
to be on her page that would get people to SOaSF or SOaSU or SOaSO or
whatever.
Anyway, lesson learned. In another community I was part of (also
resigned the list a few months back), when we started talking catchy
names, I right away registered all the basic ones (.com, .net, .org) and
immediately told the community they were available to them when a final
decision was made. Alas, the choice I was rooting for came in second
(luminerra), and thus my $21 were a waste, but would have been worth
gold to the community if some squatter had taken 'em.
Thank you all, and following David's suggestion, this is my one post for
the day on this thread :-)
Yama
_______________________________________________
IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!)
IAEP@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
