2010/10/28 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
In that case, it's our responsibility to write down a policy before we call anything a problem.
I disagree with the notion that it is a problem in the first place.
I would say, deal with such a problem when it exists. So far, nothing like that has happened.
There are dozens of use cases. If I am writing a custom application and want to demo that, creating a remix is simply and easy. OLPC is using the Fedora Remix brand since they have a custom kernel. An organization might want to create a semi private remix to distribute between their offices etc. Having the Fedora Remix brand associated with such efforts allows them to give back credit and encourage people to contribute to Fedora.
a) is not enforceable. All branding is consolidated into fedora-logos and since remixes replace that since package, you cannot force a rebuild. Red Hat does not force CentOS to rebuild all their packages either. That's something CentOS does as a quality assurance. Just replace the branding and remixes are good to use all the binaries as it is. Other than trademarks which get replaced either, nobody has any say on how the binaries are going to be used.
b) refuse how? I don't think this is enforceable or desirable either
c) don't see a point to it either.
I will tell you what. You can recommend best practise guidelines and suggest that remixes adopt those practises. You can write down a policy for mailing list announcements. Nothing else is likely going to get done here. If you believe otherwise, feel free to try.
Rahul
The policy/documentation/guidelines or lack there off is what's being
discussed here and what the board needs to revisit review and to make
sure the don't contradict the overall Fedora mission.
In that case, it's our responsibility to write down a policy before we call anything a problem.
You're action as in posting to the mailing list is only one form of the
> For what it is worth, the last release of my remix wasn't announced
> using that mailing list so I don't particular care about it anyway at
> this point.
overall problem to deal with.
I disagree with the notion that it is a problem in the first place.
For instance image if we had 50 remixes out there all of them announcing
their release to the Fedora mailing lists.
I would say, deal with such a problem when it exists. So far, nothing like that has happened.
Could you elaborate which values was initially seen in them?
> Fedora Remix as a secondary brand (along with other efforts like
> generic-logos package) was established precisely to promote the
> possibility of remixes having seen the value in them.
There are dozens of use cases. If I am writing a custom application and want to demo that, creating a remix is simply and easy. OLPC is using the Fedora Remix brand since they have a custom kernel. An organization might want to create a semi private remix to distribute between their offices etc. Having the Fedora Remix brand associated with such efforts allows them to give back credit and encourage people to contribute to Fedora.
We can also do.
a) Force all remixes to rebuild packages from source as Red Hat makes
Centos do instead of simply providing them the packages build and ready.
b) Refuse to update Remixes that do not contain the relevant trademark
packages since they have become unofficial remixes at that point.
c) Setup some form of channel subscriptions where Fedora users where
subscribed to one channel and unofficial remixes were subscribed to another.
a) is not enforceable. All branding is consolidated into fedora-logos and since remixes replace that since package, you cannot force a rebuild. Red Hat does not force CentOS to rebuild all their packages either. That's something CentOS does as a quality assurance. Just replace the branding and remixes are good to use all the binaries as it is. Other than trademarks which get replaced either, nobody has any say on how the binaries are going to be used.
b) refuse how? I don't think this is enforceable or desirable either
c) don't see a point to it either.
I will tell you what. You can recommend best practise guidelines and suggest that remixes adopt those practises. You can write down a policy for mailing list announcements. Nothing else is likely going to get done here. If you believe otherwise, feel free to try.
Rahul
_______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
