I see your point about CMS being overkill.
And I also agree with you, the release cycle anchors everything.
I for one consider it a bug, not a feature, that we have this division of
channels of communication, as some of the aspects you relate should be
feeding each other more.
It is natural
Maybe the issue here is that local labs have a much broader scope than
the global Sugar Labs?
I see local labs having something to say about everything that the
global Sugar Labs does, but not the other way around.
Regards,
Tomeu
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 17:35, Rafael Enrique Ortiz Guerrero
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Maybe the issue here is that local labs have a much broader scope than
the global Sugar Labs?
I agree completely. Hopefully the local labs will focus in on a
particular area of the sugar ecosystem. A testing lab, a
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 18:29, David Farning dfarn...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 10:39 AM, Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org wrote:
Maybe the issue here is that local labs have a much broader scope than
Yes, I guess there is no problem with this, with the already given
infrastructure give by SL is more than enough.
Local Labs are independent enough to manage to have other services.
Rafael Ortiz
On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 12:48 PM, David Farning dfarn...@sugarlabs.orgwrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009
