On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Aug 1, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Robyn Bergeron wrote: >> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Virtual_images_or_appliances_with_unmodified_Fedora_software >> >> "It is permissible to use the Fedora Trademarks without prior permission >> in connection with the provision and sale of virtual images or appliance >> distributions pre-loaded with Fedora software, provided that..." >> >> Fedora on EC2 complies with all of this. So I'm ... puzzled, I suppose, >> as to why I'm running around trying to have an "officially sanctioned" >> test day, some sort of signoff sheet, and blessing by release >> engineering, for an image that the SIG itself is entirely capable of >> creating in 5 minutes now, and obviously would test anyhow because >> people take pride in what they do, etc. > > The concern is probably how the preloading is being done, and if we start offering it now, will we continue offering it in the future, and should it be a releng task to get them uploaded at the same time we do the rest of the release. > > I will admit, that part of the policy went in and when I had the release engineer hat I didn't notice it. I think those in the releng slots get a little twitchy when "official" offerings are made that don't go through the releng team. > So I'll grant you I understand the idea of "it's official so we want it to be good". However, I think that it's perhaps missing the point, or perhaps I misunderstand it. My perception is that we want such a rigid process because we don't want anything bad/failure to be associated with the finished product that bears our name. Certainly a laudable goal. However, when we require the same onerous process we use to insure that our primary version(s) work and apply that process to 'niche' products like the F15 Design Suite (with 939 downloads as of this writing), or the F15 XFCE Spin (with 2720 downloads as of this writing)[0] it seems like we are doing something wrong. At the other end of the spectrum we have virtually no oversight of virtual images for providers like Linode, Godaddy, Amazon, RackSpace, and scores of other VPS/Cloud/Managed Service providers who are permitted to use the Fedora name and trademarks, offer Fedora virtual machines, and I'd be willing to bet that they have more Fedora 15 deployments each than we have downloads of the Design Suite. Instances where our brand is important and the basis of the choice of operating system, where people will likely never know whether the image was generated by RelEng or by $fooadmin at $provider. And I am all for it, I think it continues to put Fedora in front of our target audience, I just wonder why we want to make it so onerous to the point that I am not sure a single release/media production has complied since we put the process in place, but I can think of 4-5 instances where they were ignored, presumably in the interest of getting things done. [0] http://spins.fedoraproject.org/ _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
