On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:39:08PM -0400, Bill Bogstad wrote:
This note is only tangentially a response to Peter Robinson's...
Here's my thought process...
[meta: it's hard to know to what email are you replying or to what
topic you're speaking]
I ... don't think we can leave Sugar LiveUSB
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Martin Dengler
mar...@martindengler.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:39:08PM -0400, Bill Bogstad wrote:
This note is only tangentially a response to Peter Robinson's...
Here's my thought process...
[meta: it's hard to know to what email are you replying
Bill Bogstad wrote:
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Douglas McClendon
dmc.su...@filteredperception.org wrote:
Bill Bogstad wrote:
...
I also don't think we can leave Sugar LiveUSB to any distribution.
My impression is that both LiveCD and LiveUSB Linux distributions are
essentially
2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com:
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?
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 16:24, Daniel Drake wrote:
2009/9/16 Sebastian Dziallas:
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.
Sugar Labs needs to be a distributor because:
1) You need a product to market. The comparison with Gnome does not hold.
There have always been
2009/9/16 Philippe Clérié phili...@gcal.net:
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.
Sugar Labs needs to be a distributor because:
I disagree.
1) You need a product to market. The
This note is only tangentially a response to Peter Robinson's...
Here's my thought process...
Computer technology can improve education for children.
Collaboration (i.e. Sugar) and free software (i.e. Linux) is the best
way to make this happen.
The question is how do we get educators/schools
Peter Robinson wrote:
2009/9/16 Philippe Clérié phili...@gcal.net:
1) You need a product to market. The comparison with Gnome does not hold.
There have always been distributions that made Gnome their official desktop
environment, even very early on. That is not the case for Sugar. Whether in
It is now possible to install Sugar-Desktop ONLY to a Hard disk using
the F11 net install .iso.
It is no longer required to have Gnome or KDE as a companion
desktop.
So we do have a Sugar-Desktop distribution already in F11.
Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
Peter Robinson wrote:
2009/9/16
First, by secondary, I did not mean to imply second class. I use KDE on both
Ubuntu and Fedora. And I know they are not in anyway second class citizens
on either distribution. In this case, secondary meant alternate, other,
whatever is not the default. I apologize if I wasn't clear.
It seems
I admit to having some difficulties understanding why you would want to keep
Sugar as an upstream only. Perhaps the arguments have already been made.
I'm a late comer to the list so I am certainly unaware of what's been
discussed prior to my joining in July. If so could someone please give me
Bill Bogstad wrote:
This note is only tangentially a response to Peter Robinson's...
Here's my thought process...
Computer technology can improve education for children.
Collaboration (i.e. Sugar) and free software (i.e. Linux) is the best
way to make this happen.
The question is
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 8:22 PM, Douglas McClendon
dmc.su...@filteredperception.org wrote:
Bill Bogstad wrote:
...
I also don't think we can leave Sugar LiveUSB to any distribution.
My impression is that both LiveCD and LiveUSB Linux distributions are
essentially gimmicks for all of them.
I
14 matches
Mail list logo
