On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 12:19 +0000, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> Since we're on the topic, I've also suggested on the
"new trademark
> policy" wiki page[1], that rebranding should not be required in case you
> hand out a presentation or demo in case of an ISV, if you have built it
> upon Fedora and are simply handing it out to attendees of your session
> (which kinda equals to limited distribution, e.g. non-public). Same
> might apply to downstream vendors distributing appliances (like VMWare
> used to distribute .vmx files for some operating systems/distributions?)
>
> Anyway, these are just some of the thoughts that cross my mind drinking
> my first cup of coffee today... Let me know what you think ;-)
This part I'm not so sure of. "Limited distribution" in an age of
convenient bit-moving doesn't mean a whole lot. Rather, we should be
working on automation for rebranding that makes the whole operation easy
for anyone that wants to do it -- so the requirement is less onerous.
Sorry to reply to myself. I wanted to make it doubly clear that I'm
*only* talking about spins that use non-Fedora bits. The barrier for
spins using only Fedora bits should be as low as possible.
--
Paul W. Frields
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://paul.frields.org/ - -
http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug