-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hi, we have a contributor who posted a modified logo with fedora-ve
text in it.
Is it valid to do such modifications? I dont want to punish him but
certainly he has a point on localizing the logo somehow.
What's the policy in this case? To encourgae him to make it "the
right" or not to modify it at all ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 27/07/2006 Karlie Robinson wrote:
> Have you talked with the vendor about Sponsoring the shirts? As in
> would they be willing to cover part of the costs of the shirts for
> Fedora events if their logo was included on the shirt?
> You want to give away 200 shirts, that's 200 people walking around
> an advert for the vendor - there is value there.
Hmm, it can be a good idea. I will try to find some local vendor willing
to cover part of the costs.
I have a question in connection with production of Fedora T-shirts. Due
to many incoming Linux events in autumn, I will need a large amount of
the T-shirts. Because it is much cheaper to produce it locally, I have
decided to cooperate with a Polish shop which sells stuff connected with
Linux and Open Source (www.linuxstuff.pl). I am thinking of something
about 200 T-shirts. It will cost a significiant amount of money, so it
will be difficult to cover it by my own prior to get reimbursement.
Would it be possible to e.g. get half of the needed amount and pay to
the shop and later, after the stuff is received, pay them the second
half, or something like that? Or maybe have you other ideas how to
"The article revealed that many distributions' maintainers were
erroneously assuming that they did not need to provide source
repositories for packages they did not modify, so long as the original
upstream distribution did provide the source code. This responsibility
is by no means new, but seems to have been widely overlooked. David
Turner, GPL compliance officer at the Free Software Foundation,
suggested that these distros might come into compliance by making some
arrangement with the upstream supplier.
Turner's suggestion was rejected by Max Spevack, Fedora Board chair,
partly because of the possible expense, but chiefly because it might
encourage forking and leave the upstream distribution open to legal
liability for the downstream one."
Not sure how a agreement with upstream would encourage forking. Max, can
you expand on that?
Needless to say, a better working arrangement with derivative
distributions is pretty important for Fedora. We have a number of Fedora
derivatives out there that could be doing interesting modifications that
we need to look at.
> And we need to do a better job feeding back to Fedora. There's just so
> little time!
Could we offer the needed infra-structure to facilitate this?
> Matthew Miller mattdm(a)mattdm.org <http://mattdm.org/>
> Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Embaixador Global do Fedora