On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 08:05:47PM -0500, David Farning wrote: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Bill Bogstad <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sugar Labs, a volunteer-driven, non-profit organization, is a member > > project of the Software Freedom Conservancy. The mission of Sugar Labs > > is to support the Sugar community of users and developers and > > establish regional, Sugar around the world to help learn how to by > > tailoring Sugar to local languages and curricula. > > > > can not be accomplished at this time without a Sugar Labs produced > > distribution (or perhaps more accurately a 'spin' of some pre-existing > > distribution). > > One of the primary reasons for Spinning Sugar Labs off from OLPC was > to create a abstraction barrier between upstream sugar development and > OLPC specific needs. How did that abstraction barrier strengthen or > weaken OLPC and Sugar Labs decision making and development process?
The lack of abstraction barrier helped OLPC ship a hardware + software product. The barrier helps OLPC and Sugar Labs build on the strengths of each hardware- / software-production process. > What has changed in the last 18 months to make those abstraction > barriers more or less necessary? Nothing. Their necessity has been strengthened: the processes and audiences have grown apart (SL is not supporting 1 million XO-1s in use). > How will those abstraction barriers be affected by having Sugar Labs > produce a distribution? They'll be torn down. > david Martin
pgpshOLSBafS3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ SoaS mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/soas
