10:49 a.m.
Here's the direct link:
http://www.capstrat.com/development/fedora/fedoraLogo_21.jpg
It's also at the end of the presentation under "modifications":
http://www.capstrat.com/development/fedora
We've revised the color and shapes so the "f" stands out more.
Best,
matt
•••
Matthew Muñoz | Capstrat | 919-882-1975
11:04 a.m.
On 11/9/05, Matt Munoz <mmunoz(a)capstrat.com> wrote:
Here's the direct link:
http://www.capstrat.com/development/fedora/fedoraLogo_21.jpg
It's also at the end of the presentation under "modifications":
http://www.capstrat.com/development/fedora
We've revised the color and shapes so the "f" stands out more.
While I agree that the change in shape helps here, I am concerned that
the effect relies too heavily on color shading. If the secondary
color palette of the infinity symbol is meant to be extensible for
subprojects, we run the risk of limiting the number of useful
secondary colors to those few which enhance the contrast. It looks
to me that this modification drops the idea of the secondary color
completely, I'm not sure that's the best trade-off. I'd like to avoid
a situation where new subprojects have to nitpick between 72 different
shades of orange to find just the right one that has reasonable
contrast but still provide a way for subprojects to make a distinction
between themselves in the framework of the logo. I'd also enjoy
seeing this in grey scale to see if the change in color continues to
aid in contrast. I still feel that a sort of narrow outline/inline
which has been presented earlier would provide the most robust
solution without overly restricting the secondary color palette and as
an added bonus you might be able to recover a version of the logo that
has a distinct f even in 2-tone black and white instead of grey
scale.
-jef
11:15 a.m.
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
It looks to me that this modification drops the idea of the
secondary
color completely, I'm not sure that's the best trade-off. I'd like to
avoid a situation where new subprojects have to nitpick between 72
different shades of orange to find just the right one that has
reasonable contrast but still provide a way for subprojects to make a
distinction between themselves in the framework of the logo.
This modification does, in fact, drop the idea of a secondary color
completely.
I do think there's plenty of debate, long-term, to be had around how
individual subprojects are branded. But the imperative was to nail down
this first logo, and the prospect of maintaining a complex color palette
for all the colors of the rainbow simply didn't seem practical in the end.
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
11:08 a.m.
Thanks, Matt.
These modifications are what we're going with. We're in a position now
where it's time to get on with things. We'll be seeing new logos on
fedora.redhat.com and fedoraproject.org as soon as is practicable --
hopefully within the week.
Some people will love this logo, and some people will hate this logo.
That's simply the way things work. I certainly hope that more people love
it than hate it, but really, it's just a symbol. What matters is how
people will feel when they see that symbol. While the right image can
help set the tone, that feeling has *much* more to do with how we serve
the people who use Fedora, and contribute to Fedora.
I'd like to say that we did this "the right way." I think we did, but
where there are so many opinions, one never has the luxury of being
completely sure. So I'd like to ask some questions of you all, now that
we're basically at the end of this particular project:
* Should we have gone through more iterations, or would more iterations
have dragged things out even longer?
* Should we have exposed the logo to more people for comment, or should we
have restricted comment to this list -- which is composed of people who
clearly take a more active interest in the well-being of Fedora?
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Matt Munoz wrote:
Here's the direct link:
http://www.capstrat.com/development/fedora/fedoraLogo_21.jpg
It's also at the end of the presentation under "modifications":
http://www.capstrat.com/development/fedora
We've revised the color and shapes so the "f" stands out more.
Best,
matt
���
Matthew Mu�oz | Capstrat | 919-882-1975
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
12:02 p.m.
On Wed, 2005-11-09 at 12:08 -0500, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
Thanks, Matt.
These modifications are what we're going with. We're in a position now
where it's time to get on with things. We'll be seeing new logos on
fedora.redhat.com and fedoraproject.org as soon as is practicable --
hopefully within the week.
Some people will love this logo, and some people will hate this logo.
That's simply the way things work. I certainly hope that more people love
it than hate it, but really, it's just a symbol. What matters is how
people will feel when they see that symbol. While the right image can
help set the tone, that feeling has *much* more to do with how we serve
the people who use Fedora, and contribute to Fedora.
I'd like to say that we did this "the right way." I think we did, but
where there are so many opinions, one never has the luxury of being
completely sure. So I'd like to ask some questions of you all, now that
we're basically at the end of this particular project:
* Should we have gone through more iterations, or would more iterations
have dragged things out even longer?
I don't think more iterations would necessarily have helped. But a
broader call to submit logos would have been good. If people on fedora
forums, etc had been asked if they would like to provide logo samples
before decisions had been made that would have allowed some of these
"popular alternatives" to surface at a point in time when it would have
been useful.
* Should we have exposed the logo to more people for comment, or
should we
have restricted comment to this list -- which is composed of people who
clearly take a more active interest in the well-being of Fedora?
Is the logo for the product to represent itself or for the community to
unite under? I think, in a community project, the logo is something the
community needs to want to associate themselves with. Do I belong to
the "speech-bubble-infinity-stylized-f-group", the "red-swirl-group",
or
the "silver-pacman-group". So it would been better for the community
to have had a more active role in this particular decision.
-Toshio
12:39 p.m.
Hi
I don't think more iterations would necessarily have helped. But
a
broader call to submit logos would have been good. If people on fedora
forums, etc had been asked if they would like to provide logo samples
before decisions had been made that would have allowed some of these
"popular alternatives" to surface at a point in time when it would have
been useful.
Apart from this open mailing list with public archives, it was mentioned
in Fedora News atleast twice. Weekly issues are announced both in the
fedora announcement list and to the frontpage newssection in the Fedora
forum among various places such as lwn.net and distrowatch.com. Such
announcements to the forum were originally done by Thomas Chnug. Luya
Tshimbalanga posts these to the forum and I move it to the news section
everytime these days.
http://fedoranews.org/mediawiki/index.php/Fedora_Weekly_News_Issue_4
http://fedoranews.org/wiki/Fedora_Weekly_News_Issue_11
Is the logo for the product to represent itself or for the community
to
unite under? I think, in a community project, the logo is something the
community needs to want to associate themselves with. Do I belong to
the "speech-bubble-infinity-stylized-f-group", the "red-swirl-group",
or
the "silver-pacman-group". So it would been better for the community
to have had a more active role in this particular decision.
Its for the project to represent itself. As a community project,
interested people can always participate in it. Those who had enough
interest in the marketing aspects of Fedora subscribed themselves and
took part in the discussions and proposed various logos.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/LogoIdeas
The discussion has been going on for months in a open and public list. I
am not sure what exactly could have been done to publicize such efforts
better. Suggestions?
regards
Rahul
1:53 p.m.
On 11/9/05, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
* Should we have gone through more iterations, or would more
iterations
have dragged things out even longer?
Strictly speaking I think neither. I think the missing element isn't
iterations or time per iteration.. but an aspect of choice, limited
choice.
Whether it be a discussion of default background, or codename, or
logo. I'd like to see 2 or 3 reasonable choices presented for feedback
before the final decision.
To me most discussion should run sort of like this:
1) very free-form brain-storming discussion with lots of crazy crap
from this debate comes a sense of bounds as to constraints on the
solution space.
The more variety of out of bounds ideas you can generate the
better you understand
the boundary of the problem. And you hope to get a sense of
important themes that a
solution should try to incorporate.This is the discussion that
puts the item on the map
as an action item. No-one should expect a solution to come fully
formed from
this discussion.
2) applying the constraints, task a team or individual to spin up 2
or 3 solutions which
individually meet the constraints but provide different
interpretations as to mix of
important themes. Make sure its clear how the final decision is
going to be made at this
point.
3) focused feedback discussion on those specific 2 or 3 choices.
This allows for some ability to compare and contrast between the
presented choices,
instead of degrading into a simple "this sucks." Most likely, all
choices will be equally
recieved across the spectrum of interested people.. publicly
validating the fact that any
of the set of choices will serve equally well/poorly.
4) final decision is made however was decided in step 2.
If we fell down in this discussion, its in the fact that we only had
one draft for consideration which met the constraints at step 2.
-jef
3:51 p.m.
On 11/9/05, Jeff Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
1) very free-form brain-storming discussion with lots of crazy crap
from this debate comes a sense of bounds as to constraints on the
solution space.
I thought we did that. We had puppies and goats and periodic tables and all
sorts of stuff flying around. The bounds were things like "we're sticking to
blue" and "no hats".
2) applying the constraints, task a team or individual to spin up 2
or 3 solutions which individually meet the constraints but provide
different
interpretations as to mix of important themes.
We did that too, before and after Matt's design. After his design there were
some suggestions made (make the f look more like an f, pronounce the
infinity symbol more). Of the community submitted variations on Matt's
design, the only ones near professional enough to even consider were the
ones from earlier this week that looks like rain dropping into a pond. If
you mean that Matt or Red Hat should have produced more than one version, I
think that would have only encouraged apples to oranges discussions. You
simply can't look at a nike style swoop v. Adidas three stripes, and start a
discussion about which is "better" and make any sense of it. RH took the
requirements, distilled the high points of teh discussion and likely went
over tons of iterations internally. Someone had to make final cut or or we'd
all still be explaining to new list members that a blue hat with a puppy in
it wasn't gonna fly.
3) focused feedback discussion on those specific 2 or 3 choices.
I don't know that this was run any differently than say deciding which
packages to include in Core. The people who cared were consulted. Those who
cared the most, gave the most feedback. But at the end of the day, this is a
legal issue as well as a branding issue, and RH is the sugar daddy, so it's
their call. They have to hire the lawyers to protect it, they have to live
with it as an extension of their brand. When you compare RH sales to their
market cap, you realize their brand is worth a couple of billion dollars. So
I think they could have handled the task very well with out without the
immense and multi-month consultation they facilitated about it. And if this
was about the software, and not about tradmarks and legal issues and
marketing and branding I would have welcomed a massive referendum. But it is
about all those things as well as making everyone feel as included as we
can.
If we fell down in this discussion, its in the fact that we only had
one draft for consideration which met the constraints at step 2.
I dunno, I saw 5-6 designs come out after Matt's. He doesn't have to produce
multiple logos for us to have seen multiple logos. Now, we stopped posting
all of them at some point I noticed, but we had an awful lot of input and
opportunity in the last several months to register our feelings.
--jeremy
4:31 p.m.
On 11/9/05, Jeremy Hogan <jeremy.hogan(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I dunno, I saw 5-6 designs come out after Matt's. He doesn't
have to
produce multiple logos for us to have seen multiple logos. Now, we stopped
posting all of them at some point I noticed, but we had an awful lot of
input and opportunity in the last several months to register our feelings.
I was talking about 2 or 3 'tasked' designs... the key here being
'tasked'... where specific people are asked to report back within
constraints. The 5 -6 modifications we saw from people committed to
the discussion after the single 'tasked' design is modification
feedback.
Those aren't the people I'm trying to address in step 2.
When presented with a choice, casual and yet opinionated observers I
feel are more likely to give feedback of the form "I like A over B"
instead of simply "the single choice blows monkey chunks, i hate
you..die." I want a process that fights the tendency to reach
backwards as new people discover the discussion half-way through the
process but still gives those people a way to voice an opinion that is
constructive in aggregate and does not make them feel excluded. Is
what I propose in step 2 strictly necessary to get the job done.. no.
In most cases the duplication of effort is just going to be awash,
every tasked item should be equally palatable to the community at
large. I know and you know that these sort of non-technical
touchy-feely decisions have multiple reasonable solutions, and that
the bar to be met is "good enough." The problem is the 90% of the
community doesn't necessarily get that. The processes we use need to
make the general community feel/taste/see the same thing that we as
englightened indviduals "know". I believe a little duplication at the
task assignment step dampens whatever rash and irrational accusations
about process exclusion find their way into the larger community who
have no been following the process discussion and helps prevent the
appearence that final solutions are being completely dictated.
-jef
But I feel the extra effort appeases the ever present demons of
general community upkeep over the decision making process.
9:26 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
To reiterate: the logo is done. I know that everyone would like "just a
little more time," but a little more time will satisfy no one, because "a
little more time" will not result in substantial changes. It's time to
put this episode behind us, and figure out what we've learned.
As the new logo continues to make its way through the world, the opinions
will vary widely. As always, the people who hate the new logo will be the
ones who voice their opinions the loudest. Get ready to hear that the
logo is a horrorshow, because you'll hear it a lot -- for about a week.
Again: the community will not rally round the flag, or refuse to rally
round the flag, because this logo is or isn't perfect.
They will, however, judge us on how we chose to come up with this logo.
If we made some mistakes, and I believe we did, then we should acknowledge
them. I think that Jef is correct in his analysis. In hindsight, we
should have:
a. Had more than one concept for the community to examine;
b. Advertised more widely that we were working on the logo -- and
also, advertising that the place for those logo discussions
was this mailing list.
So we'll learn those lessons and we'll move forward.
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On 11/9/05, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> * Should we have gone through more iterations, or would more iterations
> have dragged things out even longer?
Strictly speaking I think neither. I think the missing element isn't
iterations or time per iteration.. but an aspect of choice, limited
choice.
Whether it be a discussion of default background, or codename, or
logo. I'd like to see 2 or 3 reasonable choices presented for feedback
before the final decision.
To me most discussion should run sort of like this:
1) very free-form brain-storming discussion with lots of crazy crap
from this debate comes a sense of bounds as to constraints on the
solution space.
The more variety of out of bounds ideas you can generate the
better you understand
the boundary of the problem. And you hope to get a sense of
important themes that a
solution should try to incorporate.This is the discussion that
puts the item on the map
as an action item. No-one should expect a solution to come fully
formed from
this discussion.
2) applying the constraints, task a team or individual to spin up 2
or 3 solutions which
individually meet the constraints but provide different
interpretations as to mix of
important themes. Make sure its clear how the final decision is
going to be made at this
point.
3) focused feedback discussion on those specific 2 or 3 choices.
This allows for some ability to compare and contrast between the
presented choices,
instead of degrading into a simple "this sucks." Most likely, all
choices will be equally
recieved across the spectrum of interested people.. publicly
validating the fact that any
of the set of choices will serve equally well/poorly.
4) final decision is made however was decided in step 2.
If we fell down in this discussion, its in the fact that we only had
one draft for consideration which met the constraints at step 2.
-jef
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
9:41 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
On 11/10/05, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
b. Advertised more widely that we were working on the logo -- and
also, advertising that the place for those logo discussions
was this mailing list.
If only we had known about Wulf's absolutely burning desire to
dissiminate information through the blogosphere 4 months ago. Now
that he's made a belated appearance.. I suggest we shackle him with
some sort of official sounding title and make him accountable for
getting the word out about other marketing initiatives that are in
process now. The user testimonial collection concept spring easily to
mind as something Wulf could wax eloquent about right now across a
variety of mediums and drive a summary of community input back to the
marketting group and have it actually be timely.
-jef"tag you're it"spaleta
9:54 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
LOL!
Mr. Wulf, looks like you're being drafted. That's what you get for being
so damned eloquent. :)
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On 11/10/05, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> b. Advertised more widely that we were working on the logo -- and
> also, advertising that the place for those logo discussions
> was this mailing list.
If only we had known about Wulf's absolutely burning desire to
dissiminate information through the blogosphere 4 months ago. Now
that he's made a belated appearance.. I suggest we shackle him with
some sort of official sounding title and make him accountable for
getting the word out about other marketing initiatives that are in
process now. The user testimonial collection concept spring easily to
mind as something Wulf could wax eloquent about right now across a
variety of mediums and drive a summary of community input back to the
marketting group and have it actually be timely.
-jef"tag you're it"spaleta
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
4:32 p.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
Heh, thanks for the shout out Jef, and the guidance. Much appreciated.
Greg, let me send you my resume and put in an official sounding
application for the official sounding title, with Jef as my referee.
Testimonials it is. Let me use my powers for good, and try to coordinate
my madness a little better so that people don't have to change their
pants or take a double dose of their medication after I fire up the
browser (sorry about that guys...)
On the logo, let me make a humble contribution to the process dialog.
Let me preface this by saying: "In my humble opinion"
Let's let the community mother our little tyke before we present him to
the wider world. Let us comb his hair down, wipe that smudge off his
face with a handkerchief and straighten his shirt collar before sending
him out on stage. Let us stand around him and say: "That's our little
boy!". Someone else will be standing there and may be thinking: "(He
sure is one butt-ugly mofo, but....) yep, that's our boy alright - you
go get 'em champ!"
Whatever differences we might have within the community over the logo
are our business, and we talk about that at home. Once the logo goes
live to the wider world, if anyone mouths off over it, that person above
will the first to snarl: "You watch your mouth about my kid!"
Because then it's no longer about visual design, it's about community.
It's about sitting around the table on an afternoon with a pot of a hot
drink and sharing feelings, swapping nonsense stories, and mouthing off
about what you think about the world.
That logo is not simply a collection of vectors or rasterized bits, it's
a visual representation of our community. Let's help to percolate that,
and try to avoid people feeling that they were left out somehow. When
the logo is unveiled to the world, our community is in the know, part of
the surprise, rather than the surprised.
Whatever aspects could have been done better up to this point are
already there, but I think a significant opportunity is still open to us
at this point.
Anyway, that's my 10c contribution to the last leg of the process.
Others are driving this process, I'm just giving suggestions from the
cheap seats.
Now, let me see about these Testimonials....
--josh
Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
LOL!
Mr. Wulf, looks like you're being drafted. That's what you get for being
so damned eloquent. :)
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On 11/10/05, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> b. Advertised more widely that we were working on the logo -- and
>> also, advertising that the place for those logo discussions
>> was this mailing list.
>>
> If only we had known about Wulf's absolutely burning desire to
> dissiminate information through the blogosphere 4 months ago. Now
> that he's made a belated appearance.. I suggest we shackle him with
> some sort of official sounding title and make him accountable for
> getting the word out about other marketing initiatives that are in
> process now. The user testimonial collection concept spring easily to
> mind as something Wulf could wax eloquent about right now across a
> variety of mediums and drive a summary of community input back to the
> marketting group and have it actually be timely.
>
> -jef"tag you're it"spaleta
>
> --
> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
> Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>
>
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
4:47 p.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
On 11/10/05, Joshua Wulf <jwulf(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Testimonials it is. Let me use my powers for good, and try to
coordinate
my madness a little better so that people don't have to change their
pants or take a double dose of their medication after I fire up the
browser (sorry about that guys...)
See the thread from Oct 24th "Fedora user testimonials" and get in
touch with people who are already talking about it. John Mahowald
seems to be the defacto "owner" of the idea right now. Though this
hasn't actually been tasked as an action item as far as i know.
-jef
9:41 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
Hi
a. Had more than one concept for the community to examine;
I agree with this.
b. Advertised more widely that we were working on the logo -- and
also, advertising that the place for those logo discussions
was this mailing list.
We really need to think about how to do this better in generic terms.
How do we ensure that the initiatives, new projects and sub projects,
upcoming releases, updates and various other news bits like reviews, PR
etc reach the community in a better way?
I have added a proposal to the schedule to be discussed during the
upcoming meetings
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/Schedule
regards
Rahul
8:46 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 10:26 -0500, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
To reiterate: the logo is done. I know that everyone would like
"just a
little more time," but a little more time will satisfy no one, because "a
little more time" will not result in substantial changes. It's time to
put this episode behind us, and figure out what we've learned.
Is there a good chance the new logo will replace the current red fedora
icon on the "Applications" menu in FC5? Should I BZ this or is it
already underway?
--
Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
9:12 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
Paul W. Frields wrote:
Is there a good chance the new logo will replace the current red fedora
icon on the "Applications" menu in FC5? Should I BZ this or is it
already underway?
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-November/msg00312....
fedora-logos-1.1.33-1
---------------------
* Thu Nov 10 2005 John (J5) Palmieri <johnp redhat com> - 1.1.33-1
- Add symlinks for the panel icons to be the fedora logos
* Thu Nov 10 2005 John (J5) Palmieri <johnp redhat com> - 1.1.32-1
- Add new fedora logos to pixmap and icons/hicolor
redhat-artwork-0.130-1
----------------------
* Thu Nov 03 2005 John (J5) Palmieri <johnp redhat com> 0.129-4
- Add fedora logo instead of the redhat hat
--
nicu
my hats collection: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/hats
Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org
my Fedora stuff: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro
9:13 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
please excuse, ....
I know, the logo discussion is already done, but today I stumbled on
http://www.freewarenetz.de/ which lookes realy similar ...
Only wanna you you that ;-)
Kind regards
Gerold
9:13 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
Gerold Kassube wrote:
I know, the logo discussion is already done, but today I stumbled on
http://www.freewarenetz.de/ which lookes realy similar ...
It isn't so similar that people will confuse the two. It is simply a f
in a silver circle
Tejas Dinkar
9:16 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
Gerold Kassube wrote:
please excuse, ....
I know, the logo discussion is already done, but today I stumbled on
http://www.freewarenetz.de/ which lookes realy similar ...
Only wanna you you that ;-)
I am sure there are some logos which look similar. Thanks for the note
though.
regards
rahul
9:16 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
Yeah, we need to get that stuff moving for FC5. I'd say bugzilla it.
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Thu, 2005-11-10 at 10:26 -0500, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> To reiterate: the logo is done. I know that everyone would like "just a
> little more time," but a little more time will satisfy no one, because "a
> little more time" will not result in substantial changes. It's time to
> put this episode behind us, and figure out what we've learned.
Is there a good chance the new logo will replace the current red fedora
icon on the "Applications" menu in FC5? Should I BZ this or is it
already underway?
--
Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
Fedora Documentation Project: http://fedora.redhat.com/projects/docs/
9:24 a.m.
New subject: Logo lessons
There will be an article discussing the new logo in the upcoming Red Hat
Magazine. That's all that's planned currently.
--g
_____________________ ____________________________________________
Greg DeKoenigsberg ] [ the future masters of technology will have
Community Relations ] [ to be lighthearted and intelligent. the
Red Hat ] [ machine easily masters the grim and the
] [ dumb. --mcluhan
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
>Yeah, we need to get that stuff moving for FC5. I'd say bugzilla it.
>
>--g
>
>
The logo changes are already reflected in rawhide. Any plans to do a
formal announcement for this logo?
regards
Rahul
--
Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
Fedora-marketing-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
3:07 a.m.
In order to see what this logo would look like with reduced colors, I
grabbed the image and started playing. Although it would have been nice
to have access to the master materials (including the _free font_ --
hint, hint), I didn't. The curious can see these versions on the wiki:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PatrickBarnes/Logo
--
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64(a)n-man.com
www.n-man.com
--
6734
days inactive
6736
days old
marketing@lists.fedoraproject.org
23 comments
12 participants
participants (12)
-
Gerold -
Greg DeKoenigsberg -
Jef Spaleta -
Jeremy Hogan -
Joshua Wulf -
Matt Munoz -
Nicu Buculei -
Patrick W. Barnes -
Paul W. Frields -
Rahul Sundaram -
Tejas Dinkar -
Toshio Kuratomi