On Mon, 2003-11-10 at 20:58, Brent Fox wrote: > On Sun, 2003-11-09 at 13:14, seth vidal wrote: > > > As far as the trademarks go, Yellow Dog ships with all the > > > redhat-config-* tools and I don't think that trademarks have ever been > > > a problem. > > > > I'd really want a confirmed answer on this one. Just b/c something > > "hasn't been a problem" doesn't mean it won't become a problem. > > Ok, here's the word from the legal department: > > "Red Hat never asked anyone to change the package names in the manner > that we tell them that they cannot redistribute RED HAT LINUX under the > RED HAT brand name without a written agreement with Red Hat. At the > same time, we recognize the confusion this may cause, and Red Hat will > endeavor to amend package names to remove the "redhat" reference as new > releases permit." > > > So it was bad practice for us to put the 'redhat' name into the package > names in the first place. I am asking for clarification about > 'fedora'. It is possible that the same trademark problems that exist > with the 'redhat' name will exist for 'fedora' as well. > > At the moment, I'm leaning toward Andre's suggestion of "system-config" Give me system-config-foo over fedora-config-foo any day. "system-config" is so painfully obvious once you see it it's hard to figure how the heck that wasn't thought/used in the first place :) - Panu -