Web   ·   Wiki   ·   Activities   ·   Blog   ·   Lists   ·   Chat   ·   Meeting   ·   Bugs   ·   Git   ·   Translate   ·   Archive   ·   People   ·   Donate

#sugar-meeting, 2010-05-07

Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
11:03 SeanDaly walterbender: saw mchua nm change status an hour ago
11:03 walterbender Thanks everyone for coming today.
11:03 mchua waves
11:03 walterbender I have had a bit of an upside down schedule lately, so finding a regular meeting time has been difficult.
11:04 I have a few items for today: TM, 0.90, and community
11:04 any other topics people want to discuss?
11:04 mchua Those sound exactly right to me.
11:04 is particularly looking forward to finishing up the TM discussion. :)
11:04 walterbender Well, feel free to raise additional topics as we go along.
11:04 SeanDaly walterbender: I wouldn't mind talking about release schedule & release manager position if possible
11:05 walterbender #topic TM
11:05 sdziallas is also here and lurking, gearing up slowly again after the past month.
11:05 SeanDaly greets sdziallas
11:05 walterbender Sean has made some nice edits to the TM policy draft in keeping with the discussion we had last month.
11:05 sdziallas hi SeanDaly!
11:05 SeanDaly in fact there are a few more edits I thought I could get done before the meeting, but
11:06 bumped into my limited wiki editing powers
11:06 walterbender #link http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/T[…]_Trademark_Policy
11:07 mchua walterbender: #topic?
11:07 SeanDaly here are a couple more links for context:
11:07 http://lists.sugarlabs.org/arc[…]nuary/002621.html
11:07 walterbender Maybe everyone could take a quick look. The changes are in bold.
11:07 SeanDaly http://lists.sugarlabs.org/arc[…]nuary/009933.html
11:07 walterbender mchua: the topic is already set to TM
11:07 SeanDaly And John Tierney's notes from our Boston meeting:
11:07 http://lists.sugarlabs.org/arc[…]April/010656.html
11:08 plase noe  didn't bold my edits.. sorry
11:08 mchua actually reads up and goes *d'oh*. So it is.
11:08 walterbender The new opening paragraph tries to be more welcoming and also refers to the label program
11:08 SeanDaly s/noe d/note I d/
11:08 walterbender Does it accomplish those stated goals?
11:09 SeanDaly: did you have some proposed wordsmithing for 2a/2b?
11:09 SeanDaly I added a ink to trademark registration itself at end of intro
11:10 yes
11:10 I'd like to refer to label program
11:10 walterbender (Sorry. I misspoke. Not all the changes are in bold...)
11:10 SeanDaly 2b should make it clear that permission is not jumping through lots of hoops
11:11 walterbender #link http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/inde[…]51797&oldid=49361
11:11 SeanDaly wow that is serious wiki magick
11:11 cjb SeanDaly: perhaps a "We expect that permission will be quickly granted in most cases." line or something?
11:12 SeanDaly cjb: yes, and to be honest I feel permission would be much more streamlined for FOSS projects than businesses
11:12 someone I think Bernie had mentioned a webform
11:14 on a webform we could ask for basic contact info and nature of org: FOSS project? business?
11:14 cjb SeanDaly: perhaps.. "We expect that permission will be quickly granted in most cases, and permission is especially likely for FOSS projects; the policy is mainly interested in uses by for-profit business." ?
11:14 CanoeBerry Hiya
11:14 SeanDaly cjb: yes quite, although
11:14 cjb that's not very eloquent, but could try something like that that basically says "really, don't be scared to apply if you're a FOSS project, you aren't what we're trying to protect against"
11:15 SeanDaly greets CanoeBerry
11:15 cjb: I agree
11:15 CanoeBerry Mornin/Afternoon
11:15 cjb mchua: any ideas on wording?  you're good at writing :)
11:15 (I presume all of this wording will be sent through Karen for her to reformulate anyway.)
11:15 mchua re-reads wiki page and diff
11:16 walterbender cjb: I don't think she'll have much to "refomulate" actually.
11:16 SeanDaly "We expect that permission will be quickly granted in most cases. Speedy permission is especially likely for FOSS projects; for-profit businesses may require further evaluation."
11:16 cjb SeanDaly: great
11:17 walterbender +1
11:17 SeanDaly for info, Intel label program (for OEMs) uses webform, returns written license for signature, becomes active when both copies signed on Intel side & returned to requestor
11:18 mchua cjb: "We need to write this agreement because of Legal Stuff - we hope you'll understand. We want to embrace and welcome FOSS project; please don't feel like this policy is intended to keep you out! In fact, we hope that it will do the opposite, and make clear what arrangements Sugar Labs can give you for trademark usage - and we encourage you to talk with us if you have any questions."
11:18 cjb: I've never been much for formality. ;)
11:18 I think that if that is the sentiment, we ought to just say it. I have seen other sites that have similarly human-sounding intros to their Long Legal Disclaimers, and I've always appreciated that.
11:18 cjb mchua: I think that's pretty excellent, actually
11:18 walterbender "Legal Stuff" is a bit too informal, IMHO
11:19 cjb yeah, we could choose a different phrase there
11:19 SeanDaly let's keep in mind though that we do want Sugar referred to (even by FOSS projects) in ways unique to us
11:19 cjb just s/because of Legal Stuff/for legal reasons/ ?
11:20 SeanDaly for example, we want to avoid "desktop" and "applications"
11:20 mchua cjb: worksforme.
11:20 Who's wiki-wrangling today? I don't want to edit-collide.
11:20 CanoeBerry cjb:SeanDaly:mchua:walterbender: if 1 of you 4 doesn't become a real lawyer (and paid appropriately) within 10 yrs i will be suprised :)
11:20 mchua CanoeBerry: if *I'm* the one who becomes a lawyer, I will be incredibly surprised. :P
11:20 SeanDaly and ideally horrid formulations such as "Sugar Coated Frosted Bombs Edition"
11:21 mchua almost spews water all over her laptop
11:21 CanoeBerry ;)
11:21 SeanDaly CanoeBerry: at Groklaw I interviewed lots of lawyers ;-)
11:21 walterbender where is Mel's informal graph going?
11:21 cjb walterbender: 2b
11:21 walterbender OK.
11:21 SeanDaly yes 2b
11:22 what I don't like is last phrase of 2a
11:23 I'd be happy if a distro said: "features the Sugar Learning Platform"
11:23 walterbender SeanDaly: we could eliminate the example... short is sweet
11:23 SeanDaly but, unhappy if they said "features the Sugar desktop and some apps"
11:23 the label program phrase should be in 2b
11:24 walterbender SeanDaly: OK with me to make those changes
11:24 SeanDaly we had two finalists on shortlist: "sweetened with Sugar" and "Sugar added"
11:24 mchua happy with both, honestly
11:24 cjb yeah, whatever you think is best
11:24 walterbender defers to marketing...
11:24 SeanDaly I had said I preferred the former, but now I'm ambivalent
11:25 our designers like the brevity & catchiness of the second
11:25 mchua Can we do both? Or is it better to just have one option?
11:25 SeanDaly onl downside is it's non-nutritious to pile Sugar on food
11:25 mchua: better to do one... branding means clear nified message ;-)
11:25 unified
11:26 walterbender Learning added
11:26 SeanDaly need that sugar logo o the label!
11:26 on
11:27 walterbender Well, we should move on... and leave that wordsmithing to Marketing
11:27 Is the new text in place yet?
11:27 SeanDaly I had postponed choosing the exact label (and its graphi layout) but probably better to move ahead on that... more concrete & easier for everyone to understand
11:27 walterbender: ok
11:28 walterbender I think we can vote on the policy while leaving the specifics of the label to Marketing
11:28 cjb sure
11:28 walterbender but I'd like to see Mel's and Sean's revisions in the wiki before we bring it to a vote.\
11:29 cjb when we're done 'smithing, it might be worth talking a bit about the risk of adopting the policy, and how we can work on that:
11:29 SeanDaly walterbender: just did it, please look at my new phrase
11:29 bernie btw, shall we make trademark@sugarlabs.org an rt queue?
11:30 I'd like to be on cc, for informational purposes
11:30 anyone else?
11:30 cjb yes please
11:30 mchua Yes please.
11:30 Actually, should slobs@ just be on that?
11:30 walterbender +1
11:30 SeanDaly what's an rt queue?
11:31 cjb * we're trying to do (almost) exactly what Firefox does with trademarks, but I'm worried that people only put up with this because Firefox has huge market share and already has a strong brand.. see e.g. http://lwn.net/Articles/384417/
11:31 mchua Since I would presume the trademark rulings would be granted by a motion anyhow?
11:31 SeanDaly this text in 2b should talk about the label program instead: "you may refer to your product as "derived from", "based on", or "a derivative of" a Sugar Labs mark"
11:31 cjb and:  * Firefox makes it easier for you to ship an unbranded Firefox than we make it easy to ship an unbranded Sugar
11:32 mchua grabs current text and throws it into an etherpad for easier "what's going on?" editing
11:32 one moment.
11:32 cjb (maybe we should come back to those bullet points after we finish editing)
11:32 SeanDaly cjb: it's quite possible... since Firefox has talented marketing (with a budget). But we have far more of a remix/adaptation need & probablity than they do too
11:32 mchua http://typewith.me/sugar-labs-trademark
11:33 SeanDaly: I'm merging my edit in - that's from the wiki page as of 1 minute ago, I'd be happy to merge yours in too.
11:34 SeanDaly cjb: I guess main objective is for projects to contact us; due to complexity of deployment, size of ecosystem - I believe quite more complicated than Firefox's
11:34 cjb so, reading the first paragraph of the LWN article I cited, it points out that Debian re-brands projects with trademark policies like ours, and that there's a movement for Fedora to do the same.. that movement's a minority so far, but I think that's primarily because the Firefox brand is large already
11:34 bernie SeanDaly: rt is a tool we use to handle various queues of technical support requests.
11:34 cjb SeanDaly: I know, but I think distros won't see it that way
11:34 bernie SeanDaly: it's an email based CRM
11:34 cjb they might think "oh, Sugar doesn't have a free trademark anymore, we should call it something else"
11:35 mchua SeanDaly: Basically, an RT queue is like a shared inbox with task-items instead of emails
11:35 bernie cjb: like is happening with Firefox :-)
11:35 cjb bernie: yeah
11:35 SeanDaly cjb: whereas, I'd rather they contact us, then use the trademark
11:35 cjb SeanDaly: yeah, I'm not sure about that
11:35 mchua SeanDaly: so multiple people can log in and see "ah, here are the trademark discussions that are going on, this person is handling this one, this other person is handling this other one, these two are finished, and this one is new"
11:36 cjb we have a small brand now.  if all the distros decide to stop using that brand, that seems like it leaves us with a much smaller brand.  I guess it depends how important you think having Sugar be in distros is.
11:36 what do others think?
11:36 SeanDaly Firefox is strongest FOSS brand, by orders of magnitude. With all due respect distro & desktop projects do not have successful track record with brand awareness
11:36 cjb I mean, about whether this risk that we'll be tossed out of the distros is worth it
11:36 SeanDaly: I agree with you
11:37 SeanDaly cjb: yes our brand is as weak as distros & desktops; I want to break out -> successful brand, teachers aware
11:37 cjb hm.  so, that would be great if it works, but I'm worried that the distros actually are our key to doing that.
11:38 I'm not convinced that we can spread Sugar to teachers etc. without being able to say "oh, you just apt-get install sugar"
11:38 SeanDaly cjb: concerning distro risk: we (I) could explain individually to each of them what we are trying to do
11:38 cjb: distros have extremely tiny market share... 95% plus of teachers will ask does it run on Windows or Mac?
11:38 cjb I don't want this to be a back and forth between SeanDaly and me, though -- I'm really interested in what everyone else thinks
11:39 mchua cjb, SeanDaly, walterbender, bernie, CanoeBerry, tomeu: I added my intro paragraph on http://typewith.me/sugar-labs-trademark and am trying to figure out what the other edits are and where they fit.
11:39 walterbender cjb: While I think it is important to be able to apt-get install sugar, I don't think that has anything to do with reaching teachers
11:39 mchua Can you folks take a look real quick and see what text changes remain to be made?
11:39 cjb walterbender: hm, ok.  why's it important?
11:39 mchua I think there's still the Marketing wordsmithing pointer that needs to go somewhere but I'm not sure where.
11:39 walterbender cjb: we'll reach teachers because programs like OLPC are successful... driving demand...
11:40 SeanDaly I believe Sugar will come to be known as "the software used by OLPC"
11:40 cjb walterbender: that makes sense.  but then I'm curious why you think "apt-get install sugar" *is* important, and how important that is.
11:41 walterbender it is important to broaden out reach into the FOSS community and it is the way many teachers will get Sugar given to them via third partys
11:41 cjb bernie, mchua: what do you think?  would it be a huge deal if we had to use a name in distros that isn't Sugar?
11:41 maybe sugarium, following chrome->chromium :)
11:41 bernie mchua: I don't know, that paragraphs sounds a little... false. as if it were written by some corporate CEO hoping to convince the foss community that they've not done anything bad :-)
11:42 walterbender e.g., I can tell Dell, who already ships Ubuntu, you can offer Sugar with apt-get install sugar and they will understand how easy it is...
11:42 cjb bernie is cynical of plain-sounding language :)
11:42 mchua cjb: I... am not sure what benefit that would give us yet, and I would personally be confused
11:42 tomeu cjb: I'm ok with splitting the brand in two if that makes life of marketing easier
11:42 mchua also can't keep chrome/chromium and fructose/glucose/sucrose/etc straight, though
11:42 bernie: Patches welcome. :)
11:42 tomeu there are many tensions because different people want to do very different things with codebase
11:42 bernie cjb: "our customers asked us to do this and we listened" :-))
11:42 tomeu s/codebase/a single codebase
11:42 cjb mchua: it wouldn't be done by us, it would be done by the distros in response to our trademark policy, because they might not want to have to ask our permission to modify our software.
11:43 (which is why Debian renamed Firefox to Iceweasel)
11:43 SeanDaly tomeu: splitting a brand in two is like King Solomon's solution for the child
11:43 kills the por thing
11:43 poor
11:43 tomeu SeanDaly: we can still say both things are done by Sugar Labs
11:43 walterbender SeanDaly has trouble with his o key too :)
11:44 mchua cjb: Is the sugar/sugarium decision one that can be discussed later, separate from the "sugar" trademark discussion?
11:44 walterbender mchua: I think so.
11:44 tomeu SeanDaly: otherwise, we are going to step each others toes as we do more and more
11:44 mchua cjb: maybe the split's a good idea, maybe not - I don't think I'll be able to think it through well right now
11:44 but it seems like something we can do later
11:44 SeanDaly again, I think sipler to go to distros rather than wait for problems to crop up
11:44 simpler
11:44 mchua and that having a trademark policy for "sugar" alone, right now, gives us a start, and a place to stand on
11:44 SeanDaly m key too, and i key
11:45 cjb mchua: no
11:45 mchua: I'm not talking about a split *we* will initiate
11:45 walterbender mchua: I don't see your edits in the wiki...
11:45 cjb Firefox did not initiate changing their name to Iceweasel
11:45 Debian did it *in response to* Firefox's trademark policy
11:46 mchua walterbender: they're on http://typewith.me/sugar-labs-trademark right now
11:46 SeanDaly mchua: I added a phrase to intro on your Web v4 site
11:46 cjb I'm saying that our trademark policy may cause distros to unbrand their Sugar code, and wondering whether that's good or bad or indifferent.
11:46 mchua walterbender: easier to avoid edit collisions there, then merge to wiki when we're all happy with the text
11:46 SeanDaly: ah! I see you, that looks awesome
11:46 SeanDaly cjb: i would wish to avoid replicating Mozilla's bridge burning
11:47 cjb SeanDaly: yeah, if we can
11:47 walterbender mchua: I think your intro text need not be part of the policy itself, but an intro on the page where we post the policy
11:47 SeanDaly objectively, my analysis is that Mozilla cares not a whit about debian since market share so marginal
11:47 mchua walterbender: oh! yes, I think that is ideal
11:47 walterbender: I'll mark it as such.
11:47 SeanDaly Not my point of view
11:48 cjb SeanDaly: I agree, but they can afford not to care *because* Firefox's market share is so huge.
11:48 We don't have huge market share.
11:48 So being alienated by the distros could be a big deal for us.
11:48 SeanDaly I would like to say to distros: "here's a plan to make your distro more atractive & recognizable to educators"
11:49 cjb: distros are marginal, and we are marginal, so neither would lose more than the little they have :D
11:49 walterbender cjb: I don't think out text as stands is alienating, but if it is, then we can revisit...
11:49 SeanDaly what i'd like is for both to be less marginal
11:49 mchua We're not going to win distros over by saying "hey! we're both marginal!" :)
11:49 but yeah, I agree. I'm happy to work on things from the Fedora side however possible, but I can only really do things in that one space.
11:49 SeanDaly mchua: the truth hurts, there's no way to pretty it up
11:50 mchua grins.
11:50 SeanDaly from an honest assessment comes a plan to break out
11:50 bernie walterbender: I'm only preoccupied of how RH legal would interpret "minor modifications" etc.
11:50 SeanDaly I am aware that talking lke this upsets people sometimes
11:50 like
11:50 mchua SeanDaly: Sure. I've got no problem with bluntness - it's what's made Fedora marketing actually grow over the past 9 months. (Not much, but at least we've started.)
11:51 bernie: And I would personally walk to the offices of RH legal if questions were to come up.
11:51 bernie walterbender: they may think it's no longer open source because you cannot make the background black and change the XO icon with a red hat.
11:51 mchua: +1
11:51 mchua I can only really do things from the Fedora/RH side here, but I will do *anything* I can to make stuff happen on that front.
11:51 bernie mchua: can you show them this policy and ask their opinion about it?
11:51 mchua bernie: RH legal?
11:52 bernie: Well, I'll be down at headquarters in a week, I can certainly try. :)
11:52 SeanDaly bernie: we can and should explain everyone's interest in keeping system iconography unified
11:52 mchua bernie: It's more likely to be "hi! can haz favor?" than "Red Hat cares deeply about Sugar Labs as a potential business partner!" (imo) but I'll certainly ask the folks I know to take a look.
11:52 bernie SeanDaly: I'd be ok approving our TM policy now with the provision that we'll make the necessary adjustments to please linux distributors in case of problems.
11:52 walterbender bernie: personally, I think that those changes are fine for an individual, but pretty extreme for a distro and we should chime in...
11:53 bernie: but what I am more concerned with is whether our concern would be off-putting to them...
11:53 mchua bernie, SeanDaly, cjb: and even a "let us approve our TM policy now, and set an immediate next agenda item to be the distro-brand-forking question."
11:53 bernie walterbender: indeed. but in the past RH, SuSE and Ubuntu even dared changing all the icons of Gnome and KDE and adding/removing menu entries
11:53 SeanDaly bernie: distros without marketing strategies?
11:54 mchua bernie, SeanDaly, cjb: with specific lists of distros/companies/etc. we want to have these conversations with
11:54 I just don't want to block *having* a TM policy any longer
11:54 bernie walterbender: KDE and Gnome cried aloud and outraged, but it was really in the best interest of users.
11:54 walterbender bernie: I think that is apples and oranges...
11:55 bernie SeanDaly: it was necessary for *their* branding strategy to rebrand KDE and Gnome. You know, replace the foot with the distro logo, make icons and colors consistent...
11:55 SeanDaly mchua: yes, as I say i think we should take the plan to them. but downside could be endless discussions & controversy, time beter spent working on beakout
11:55 mchua My question is: is this TM policy right enough? Is it written so that at the very least, nothing can irreversibly hurt us? Can we talk with distros later?
11:55 walterbender bernie: our ultimate motivation is kids learning, but I think we want to discuss with the distros the merits of messing around...
11:55 mchua SeanDaly: Yeah, I don't want to block on endless distro discussions either.
11:55 walterbender as oppose to being indifferent.
11:55 mchua looks at the time.
11:56 Our hour is almost up, and I would *very* much like to pass v.1.0 of this.
11:56 SeanDaly mchua: 2b needs to evoke label program I'll try an edit
11:56 mchua And make note of the further discussions we need to have wrt additions and whatnot later on.
11:56 cjb mchua: let's get the latest text back into the wiki, then
11:56 mchua SeanDaly: thanks!
11:56 cjb so we know what we're passing
11:56 mchua cjb: wait for Sean's edit
11:56 cjb also, what does it mean to pass it -- is it "this is live immediately", or "we're going to send this to Karen, and it'll be live later, but here it is so you know what our intent is"?
11:57 mchua cjb: The latter, I would think?
11:57 walterbender cjb: I'll run it by Karen after we reach cnsensus
11:57 and then replace the main page
11:57 SeanDaly mchua: I don't know how to validate edits on that site o' yours
11:57 cjb k
11:57 bernie mchua: I never said we should block the vote on this
11:58 mchua: SeanDaly: I'd be ok approving our TM policy now with the provision that we'll make the necessary adjustments to please linux distributors in case of problems.
11:58 walterbender bernie: I think we are always going to be open to revising the policy if it is not working for some aspect of our community
11:59 I wouldn't single out GNU/Linux distros
11:59 mchua SeanDaly: Validate? You just type, it's all the same document.
11:59 SeanDaly bernie: I don't agree, since I haven't seen breakout marketing at the distros... I believe they are cpable of it, but I haven't seen it
11:59 cjb SeanDaly: the reason to want to please distros is not only a marketing reason
12:00 it's a developer-pool reason, and a make-it-easy-for-people-to-get-sugar reason
12:00 SeanDaly cjb: of course
12:00 cjb 'k
12:00 mchua SeanDaly: Are all your edits in?
12:00 Are we ready to merge this back to the wiki and take a vote?
12:01 walterbender cjb, bernie: I don't think we are so far off the mark, but if we are, we'll come back to this forum and fix it.
12:01 mchua Does anyone have any objections, concerns, last revisions...?
12:01 bernie walterbender: k
12:01 SeanDaly mchua: do you see "we strongly encourage" ?
12:01 bernie SeanDaly: seen. very good
12:02 walterbender just say no to adverbs
12:02 ^strongly^^
12:02 SeanDaly I don't know what 5c refers to, Activities? Necessary? I don't like "Sugar Ready", is that an artifact?
12:02 walterbender: hee hee ok
12:02 mchua SeanDaly: "we strongly encourage you to participate in our label program, designed to help educators recognize your project as a good choice for learning." Yep.
12:03 SeanDaly I just took out that strongarm adverb
12:03 walterbender SeanDaly: :)
12:04 SeanDaly We need to refer to Activities, but that's a can of worms. :-(
12:04 CanoeBerry timecheck / aside when we get to it: are we meeting next week fri 11am EDT? 0.90 / community thoughts whenever..
12:04 SeanDaly in plain English, we need to say that we want to foster the growth of a vibrant ecosystem of Activities
12:04 cjb SeanDaly: hm, what does that have to do with trademarks?
12:05 SeanDaly that rev can wait for later though, not critical.
12:05 walterbender cjb: I agree... we are getting into marketing here
12:05 cjb I mean, I agree that we want to do that, but I don't see how the trademark policy is involved in it
12:05 SeanDaly cjb: Activity authors may be scared by our policy, we need to reassure & invite
12:05 cjb oh, right
12:05 SeanDaly I mean, 5c they might think applies to them
12:06 "Do I need certification for my Activity"?
12:06 cjb yes, this is a great point
12:06 SeanDaly I'd rather not go there, but reassure Activity authors
12:06 mchua #info Trademark policy for Activity authors - later revision
12:06 #info Conversations with distros on trademark policy - later revision, discussion
12:06 There we go, all logged :)
12:07 So, how about that text we've got up there? ;)
12:07 SeanDaly So can I zap 5c ?
12:07 walterbender SeanDaly: OK
12:07 cjb yeah
12:07 mchua SeanDaly: certification? Yeah, I don't think we know what that means now anyhow.
12:07 bernie SeanDaly: +1
12:08 SeanDaly section 6: we need a link to that logo page
12:08 that will also be a rev since the marketing team has worked a bit on merchandising
12:08 mchua I'll find it.
12:09 SeanDaly: Logo page URL inserted, line 92.
12:09 SeanDaly I added some words under "Contact information"
12:10 I volunteer to work up a FAQ from existing questions/answers section
12:10 mchua Awesome.
12:11 #action SeanDaly work up FAQ from existing quesitons/answers section
12:11 #action mchua ask for informal thoughts on TM policy from RH/Fedora legal-type folks
12:11 (I'll do that once we approve this. ;)
12:12 SeanDaly I can approve this text as a v1, subject to revision concerning labelng program
12:12 here's an idea: I instigate consultations with distros once the label logo is ready?
12:13 walterbender SeanDaly: sounds like a plan in any case
12:13 mchua I like it. :)
12:13 I'm happy with this text as a v1 as well.
12:13 walterbender, tomeu, cjb, CanoeBerry, bernie?
12:13 walterbender OK. Anyone wanna make a motion to approve v1?
12:13 SeanDaly intro: please come talk with us: we should make it easy with link
12:14 MOTION: Approve current trademark policy text as v1, subject to refinements concerning label program currently in preparation?
12:14 walterbender seconds the motion
12:15 any further discussion before we vote?
12:15 SeanDaly is ready
12:15 tomeu the text from the wiki? or typewithme?
12:15 SeanDaly typewithme needs to be merged to wiki
12:15 mchua I will merge it now!
12:15 One moment.
12:16 bernie mchua: as you merge, make sure you slip in a clause "42b. all your base are belong to us"
12:16 mchua #link http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/T[…]_Trademark_Policy
12:16 bernie: too late ;)
12:17 walterbender bernie: we only want first born children and bags of gold
12:18 OK. Let's bring the motion to a vote...
12:18 yes
12:18 mchua bernie: I proposed accepting genie wishes as well but was turned down on account of they are sometimes nontransferable, and subject to export restrictions in certain countries
12:18 aye
12:18 SeanDaly yea
12:18 bernie yea
12:18 cjb aye
12:19 bernie yarrrr
12:19 mchua CanoeBerry: ^
12:19 tomeu: ^
12:19 Well, we have a pass anyhow. :) and they can chime in via email.
12:19 walterbender the motion passes!!!
12:19 SeanDaly =whew=
12:19 mchua breaks out the party hats
12:20 walterbender has beads of sweat pouring from his brow :)
12:20 mchua Who wants to do the big announce? :D
12:20 walterbender Marketing?
12:20 sdziallas mchua: possibly Red (party) Hats? ;)
12:20 walterbender In parallel, I'll run the final text by Karen this weekend.
12:21 mchua I'm happy to do wiki cleanup - actually, lemme start http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Trademark and a bunch of redirects so Sean has a clean place to start with
12:21 walterbender #action ED to run TM text by SFC
12:21 SeanDaly yes, text should run by Karen
12:21 mchua will put a "this is the final text that is running by the SFC" big banner at the top
12:21 walterbender OK. We are already over time...
12:21 mchua sdziallas: two-color party hats - when you click them, the color combo randomly changes.
12:21 walterbender: next meeting bring up 0.90, community, release schedule/manager?
12:21 walterbender Can I quickly move to two other topics, just to queue them up for next week?
12:21 mchua that works too :)
12:22 walterbender mchua: exactly
12:22 SeanDaly personally, I'd just as soon see a mere mention in the next Sugar Digest - I propose to announce on marketing list OK ?
12:22 walterbender SeanDaly: will do.
12:23 So, we do need to discuss the positives (and negatives) of 0.88 and make a solid plan re 0.90.
12:24 And somewhat related, we need to have a discussion about the state of the community.
12:25 I am generally pleased with the overall direction we are heading, but there has been some friction of late that has led to some more heated discussions than is usual for our community.
12:25 bernie SeanDaly: what if karen totally hates our TM policy and asks us to rewrite it from scratch? :-)
12:25 mchua #link http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Trademark
12:25 SeanDaly CanoeBerry, tomeu: is there a reason you two didn't vote?
12:25 mchua SeanDaly: ^^ for you - I put in a big draft banner too
12:25 SeanDaly: I think they're afk
12:25 bernie walterbender: the thread between me and tomeu about the development process is one example
12:26 mchua also redirected http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/T[…]_Trademark_Policy to [[Trademark]] to avoid info redundancy
12:26 SeanDaly mchua: yes I think you're right
12:26 bernie tomeu: I'm sure we can both keep our technical disagreement separate from our personal relationship and work as slobs
12:26 SeanDaly mchua today is the 7th in Europe ;-)
12:27 walterbender bernie: actually, I was thinking of a different thread altogether...
12:27 SeanDaly bernie: have no fear, she told me the important thing is that we agree on the policy objectives
12:27 walterbender SeanDaly: Mel is in OZ :)
12:28 mchua does a bit of wiki syntax cleanup to [[Trademark]]
12:28 but... are we done, meetingwise?
12:28 bernie walterbender: I need to read the other lists, I guess :)
12:28 walterbender I think we are done... let's target next Friday, the 14th.
12:28 thanks everyone
12:29 SeanDaly OK
12:29 walterbender #endmeeting

Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

Powered by ilbot/Modified.