Rex Dieter (rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > Paul W. Frields wrote: > > >No one has said much about Patrick's wiki page: > > > >http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DefiningProjects > > > >I agreed to drive this project definition problem... My personal > >viewpoint is that, like logo usage, we want to be generous but > >protective about the Fedora name. I prefer that the "Ideas" listed in > >this page be promoted to "SIGs" since not only do we have a couple, but > >"Ideas" sounds a little dismissive. "SIG" gives the contributors an > >immediate feeling of group ownership. Once a SIG has more plans they > >can be owned by an official subproject until they are ready to move on, > >if that's necessary. Input please? > > (As I said somewhere else... (: ...) I agree with these sentiments to > keep things simple and stick with only SIG/Project labels. Otherwise, > IMO, the only item in need of clarifying is who exactly does "Project" > announcements (ie, the Board or the parent Project). Works for me. Which board member is going to lay down the law? Or do we leave this for Max? Bill _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
