> > > The name of the project is fedora. The name is staying and we make do > > > with what we have. > > That's extremley arrogant and silly. I just hope that this is only your > > personal opinion. > It's not arrogant at all. In fact it's quite humble. I know I do not > have the authority or power to change the name. It does raise an interesting point. "Fedora" made more sense when it was "part of Red Hat" (as opposed to the "Fedora Foundation"). Even though Red Hat has editorial control over Fedora, we shouldn't assume that they are going to make Fedora stay "Fedora." Why not? Consider the following... 1) Red Hat bosses said "no hat." That's effectively hobbling us as far as logos go. 2) The word "Fedora" is more specific than "Red Hat," but the respective products are functionally opposite that scheme. 3) Editorial control is really about the content, and not the name. Otherwise, Red Hat would be in a legal battle with UVA and Cornell. 4) It's a brave new world, and clearly a lot isn't yet sorted out. MPF -- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
