On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 03:21:24PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 17:55 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > I would propose that the trademark should be reserved for the things
> > the Board specifically approves for release, which includes the actual
> > release candidates for test phases up through final GA. For anything
> > else, the Board's approval is required, and the Board should normally
> > not entertain requests for midstream test images. This would put any
> > community member or team that wants to release test images on a level
> > playing field, and erases any confusion by a downstream consumer over
> > whether something is official Fedora.
> >
> > The removal of fedora-{logos,release,release-notes} and substitution
> > of generic-* presents an exceedingly low risk for regressions and any
> > other problems. If any are found, they should be fixed in the
> > distribution, because they are problems that exist for any potential
> > downstream remixer.
>
> Why then would we allow rawhide to be composed each night with the
> logos? Particularly in the case of the desktop image, the branding is a
> part of the end user experience and that we specifically want to test
> during the development at snapshot points and test days.
I thought about this a bit more after sending and realized there
should be a blanket approval for anything rel-eng releases, including
Rawhide. The Board could make exceptions for other purposes too, such
as where branding elements need testing. And it's not difficult for a
tester to rebrand a distributed image either.
--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
