On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tue, 2008-02-26 at 15:44 -0500, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
Haven't we been through this before?
See, I thought so too. Yet the fact that this keeps coming up says to
me that either we didn't or the people who did are no longer on the
Board and the memory didn't "institutionalize".
My understanding was that no distro, derived from All Fedora Bits (tm)
or not, could bear the Official Fedora Name unless it was blessed by
the Board. Which probably implies blessed by QA and releng. Did I
misunderstand the policy? Has policy changed, and I'm unaware of it?
That's what I understood as well.
But really, this is also about the Brand (tm). And I'm still not clear
that we have a handle on what the Brand (tm) entails.
So perhaps we should have a restatement from The Board about policies
regarding The Brand.
Exactly and worded much better than the few mails I've tried to write
today and continuously failed with.
Now, this still leaves us the "one degree removed from Fedora" branding
problem -- only now, the problem is *extremely* concrete, rather than
theoretical, as it has largely been in the past.
Personally? I'm in favor of seeing the Fedora Unity team go global, come
up with their own "FU" mark, and do with it what they will. :)
--g
--
Greg DeKoenigsberg
Community Development Manager
Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255
"To whomsoever much hath been given...
...from him much shall be asked"
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
