[Fedora-marketing-list] Re: [Ambassadors] Name for future Fedora distribition?

[David Nalley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dimitris Glezos wrote:
>  Well, merging Core and Extras doesn't necessarily mean we should
change the name
>  of our distribution. I suggest for us to consider the cost in
> changing the name.
>  
>  The name "Fedora Core" has established a reputation as "The distribution
> the
>  Fedora Project produces". If we completely discontinue the "Core" product
> as
>  such, then there is no conflict in keeping that name for our distribution. It
>  will simply have a new meaning. Besides, that's what the conscious is: we are
>  opening up Core; we are not substituting it with something new. We are just
>  changing the build processes and mechanisms. 
I think Dimitris is absolutely correct. There is a high cost with
'rebranding'. Sometimes rebranding is necessary, but I am not convinced
that our 'internal process' change (admittedly visible to anyone) is
cause enough to justify rebranding or the immense effort people would
have to go through to communicate that to the end user nothing has
changed, it's merely a process change.

Since Gregdek has said that it can't be only 'Fedora' or 'Fedora
Linux'
and has also stated that '"The Fedora Project" is the umbrella for
everything that Fedora does.' I think Fedora Core is a very apt (thought
I suppose I should say yummy instead) name, as producing a
distribution/collection of packages is the CORE or central focus of 'The
Fedora Project' .


David Nalley

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFFb2rQkZOYj+cNI1cRAos6AJ9hcP2gO+sWMF6RYCAW/8fgr7+engCggqbQ
> 67BG7dS5c5/PPExtqqe+Zi0=
> =VFuf
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----