Bill Nottingham (notting@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > Máirín Duffy (duffy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > > On 04/04/2013 10:33 AM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > ... especially since packagers aren't allowed to ship their own versions > > > of any logos. > > > > My team and I are more than happy to discuss any new or modified usages > > of the logo and produce appropriate artwork, getting it added to the > > fedora-logos package as necessary, for any packager who has the need and > > comes to us. > > I understand your desire to have input into how the logo is used. My point > is that if the logos provided *as the only logos that software in Fedora > can use* aren't suitable to use as is, it amounts to merely playing "GOTCHA!" > with people who are trying to use the right thing that the design team > has already provided them. > > If fedora-logos doesn't provide an actual version of the logomark that > corresponds to the guidelines, it's not the fault of other groups for > using the only version that's there. I'll file an RFE for fedora-logos to replace the large sprite with the one from the logos page on the wiki - that should solve this issue at least. Bill _______________________________________________ design-team mailing list design-team@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team
