On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 10:28:09PM +0200, David Van Assche wrote:
[Sugar on a Stick] should [...] describe the medium by which sugar
is delivered (a usb stick) Nowhere is there any mention of something
distro specific, nor should there be.
I'm amused that a few meme-weeks ago we had a discussion which implied
the other side: Sugar on a Stick meant a solution including not only
a specific distro's livecd .iso filesystem, but also a set of best
practices for running a Sugar-based curriculum, Sugar documentation
manuals, Sugar teacher training guidelines, XS-based (or -like) backup
solution, wireless network topology guidelines, and educational theory
suggestions. Quite the other side of a spectrum from some source
code from git.sugarlabs.org put on a USB stick with no partition
table, which I think you're saying is perfectly reasonable :).
I am actually quite surprised that this discussion is coming up on a
mailing list that is very open source based. Taking ownership of a
very generic term goes against the philosophy/politics of open
source in general.
This has nothing to do with open source as defined by its creators:
http://www.opensource.org/docs/osd . I think you're saying
appropriating a general term to disenfranchise a constituency is
unfair and inconsistent with everyone's peer-imposed duty to take a
constructive, supportive, and inclusion-sensitive role in the
community.
We need inclusion but not at all cost.
Regards,
David Van Assche
Martin
pgpx6bGihfovw.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Sugar-devel mailing list
Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org
http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
