On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 1:17 PM, David Farning <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Mel Chua <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 06/17/2010 10:28 PM, Bernie Innocenti wrote: >>> At the next meeting, I would like to propose the Fedora 11 with Sugar >>> 0.88 builds for the XO-1 and XO-1.5 as a new official project. >>> >>> It is sponsored jointly by Paraguay Educa and Activity Central, >>> coordinated by me and hosted by the Sugar Labs infrastructure: >>> >>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Deployment_Team/Sugar-0.88 >>> http://people.sugarlabs.org/bernie/olpc/f11-xo1-0.88/ >>> >>> If the board approves, I will add a link to the sidebar, near Sugar on a >>> Stick, and create a top-level homepage with content directed at users. >>> >>> I need help picking a pronounceable name, F11-0.88 is revolting. >> >> Posted to >> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Oversight_Board/Minutes#Agenda_items as a >> motion, since all the links are public anyhow and the discussion will be >> as well. >> > > I would encourage that F11-S0.88 _not_ become an official Sugar Labs > at this time. My biggest concern is maintenance responsible. If the > project becomes an official project, Sugar Labs has an implied > maintenance responsibility. If F11-S0.88 sucks, it will cast a long > shadow on the upstream project Sugar Labs not the downstream project > where that shadow belongs. > > On the other hand, if Sugar Labs would like to assume maintenance > responsibility they are welcome to roll the project into SL.
I agree with your points above. With Fedora 11 having days left of upstream support we're going back down the road of Fedora 7 OLPC style forks which it was my understanding due to the lack of people paid to support it Sugar Labs as a whole wanted to get away from that. Peter _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
