Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

Walter, I just want to point out there is a US$ 1,000 difference among Walter's motion (US $2,800) and Samson's proposal (US $1,851). Samson, You state several times you were invited to the Conference, still your budget includes US $44,37 as "Conference Fee" this is contradictory. Regards

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

I'll follow Lionel's lead on this one. Fossil fuels traveling these days should be avoided.. Additionally, SLOB's should be clear with the community and highlight the fact that according to current Software Freedom Conservancy travel policies no cash advance can be approved for members. This is

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] New ASLO Project Definition

Hi All, Just thought I'd tune in with some thoughts about the ASLO. On Fri, 2017-05-19 at 15:21 +0530, Jatin Dhankhar wrote: > Hello Chris, > > > Welcome to the Sugar Labs community, When reworking ASLO (a very > > valuable project), please do keep internationalization (i18n) and > >

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

Should we take your comment as "-1" to the proposal? BR Samson On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Lionel Laské wrote: > > I'm not for the idea: > - It's possible than some OLPC France guys will be present there. They > could present Sugar/Sugarizer to the conference as

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

For your proposal. On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Samson Goddy wrote: > Hi > Samuel, +1 for my statement or lionel's statement. > > On May 19, 2017 9:33 PM, "Samuel Cantero" wrote: > >> Not a member of SLOB but agree. +1 >> >> On Fri, May 19,

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

Hi Samuel, +1 for my statement or lionel's statement. On May 19, 2017 9:33 PM, "Samuel Cantero" wrote: > Not a member of SLOB but agree. +1 > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 3:53 PM, Samson Goddy > wrote: > >> Well, i don't know why you came up with

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

Well, i don't know why you came up with these ideas,but everyone knows that getting a visa is difficult in every country. Your team in OLPC france can also attend the event, but i and ibiam are both special guests coming from Africa. I suggest you a take a look at my proposal again. Before i came

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] New ASLO Project Definition

Thanks all for the comments. Here are my replies: On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 9:19 PM, Tony Anderson wrote: >Hi Sam, > >Thanks for the proposal. Naturally this raises the question of the relationship >between your ASLOv3 and the GSOC project. Do you see two parallel

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

I'm not for the idea: - It's possible than some OLPC France guys will be present there. They could present Sugar/Sugarizer to the conference as well. And if they do, the come from France - compared to Nigeria. - Are you sure to obtain a Visa for the conference ? French government is sometimes hard

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

I still don't know the difference of "seconded" or +1 to be honest :P But as I already said, its +1 from me On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:01 PM Walter Bender wrote: > +1 > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Sameer Verma wrote: > >> I second. >> >> Sameer

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

+1 On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Sameer Verma wrote: > I second. > > Sameer > > On May 19, 2017 5:50 AM, "Walter Bender" wrote: > > Perhaps someone can second the motion so we can begin voting? > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Samson Goddy

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

I second. Sameer On May 19, 2017 5:50 AM, "Walter Bender" wrote: Perhaps someone can second the motion so we can begin voting? On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Samson Goddy wrote: > Thank you all for the positive comments. But i am little

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

Wish I could vote. On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Walter Bender wrote: > Perhaps someone can second the motion so we can begin voting? > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Samson Goddy > wrote: > >> Thank you all for the positive comments.

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] New ASLO Project Definition

Thank you Samuel and Walter for share, I don't understand all the technicalities yet. I try to follow and learn :D I agree with Chris Leonard, we should *prioritize facilitation of the localization and internationalization (translations) process and tools*. There are few workflows that involve

Re: [IAEP] [SLOBS] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

Perhaps someone can second the motion so we can begin voting? On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Samson Goddy wrote: > Thank you all for the positive comments. But i am little sad that since > wednesday, only one vote has been made. Where we have 7 SLOBs member in >

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] New ASLO Project Definition

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 03:21:03PM +0530, Jatin Dhankhar wrote: > Hello Chris, Please continue to CC sugar-de...@lists.sugarlabs.org for developers. > Welcome to the Sugar Labs community, When reworking ASLO (a very > valuable project), please do keep internationalization (i18n) and >

Re: [IAEP] [Sugar-devel] New ASLO Project Definition

Hello Chris, Welcome to the Sugar Labs community, When reworking ASLO (a very > valuable project), please do keep internationalization (i18n) and > localization (L10n) in mind. You may or may not know that we do host > PO files for L10n of NewASLO on our Pootle translation server: >

Re: [IAEP] [SLOB] email motion re Scratch Conference

Thank you all for the positive comments. But i am little sad that since wednesday, only one vote has been made. Where we have 7 SLOBs member in this community. I am pleading to other SLOBs member to come and vote, so that i and Ibiam can have idea what to do next if this motion passes or not.