[fab] Re: [Famsco-list] New project formation is out of control

[Patrick W. Barnes]

On Tuesday 06 June 2006 23:51, "Chitlesh GOORAH" <chitlesh at fedoraproject.org> 
wrote:
> On 6/6/06, Alex Maier <lxmaier at gmail.com> wrote:
> > official blessing and to let them use the words "Fedora" and/or
> > "Ambassadors" in the project name.
>
> I don't agree with this because this will break fedora contributors
> motivation for the project. Not to let a Fedora Contributor use the
> word "Fedora" and "Ambassadors" where one thinks its appropriate for
> the best of the project would be a bit too hard, don't you think?.
>

This problem goes right along with trademark dilution concerns.  Allowing new 
contributors (or even experienced ones) to mark something in the official 
capacity of the Fedora name without first putting the idea forward for review 
and approval by peers will result in dangerous dilution, even if it is done 
with the best of intentions.  The entire reason for requiring peer review is 
that a contributor can easily be swept away by their grand ideas and can lose 
the perspective to make a good judgment call.  We're not saying that new 
projects cannot earn the Fedora name, we're saying that we want an approval 
process before a new idea can reach that level.

> We have to make the difference between a SIG and a project. I think in
> this case a SIG would be appropriate.
>

SIGs are another thing entirely, and are really outside of the scope of this 
discussion.  Anyone is welcome to start up a special interest group for any 
particular topic within Fedora.  There isn't much concern over the official 
nature of such a group or of name dilution.  If anyone disagrees, I'd love to 
hear their views.

> The another thing is that here DamienDurand is not alone with his
> Interview Idea. He has followed a "certain procedure". He pinged me a
> month ago about his idea and we have been working on this along with
> ThomasCanniot as well. In that procedure, we call for "peer review" to
> Patrick on irc before the announcement on the ML.
>

Correct, and my instructions to Damien included gather more peer review on the 
mailing list, not pushing forward a complete public announcement.  This isn't 
just Damien's fault, though.  The purpose of the message wasn't entirely 
clear, and it was taken out of context to represent an official announcement.  
That's a subject for a different discussion.  Although I have my reservations 
about the idea, it does seem very intriguing, and I wanted the rest of the 
Marketing team to have a look and provide feedback.  When it comes to 
programs like this, we need to get feedback from a broader set of 
contributors than just the Fedora France team, and I think the Marketing team 
was a good choice to present this idea to.  This would have allowed us to 
improve upon the idea and the materials before introducing it to the general 
public.

> DamienDurand proposed interview to BobJensen and MaxSpevack and they
> both agreed to answer our questions. I think that this project has a
> momentum to start became a big one.
>

That's definitely great progress.  I didn't use the Interview idea in my 
example because of any fault in the idea, but rather that it illustrated my 
point brilliantly.  The only thing that went wrong is that the project didn't 
get enough review before being presented to the general public.

> > Patrick, want to take a stab at a short and snappy set of rules?
> > Famsco can then vote.
>
> I consider Peer review needs to be a must and as well we have to make
> the difference between a SIG and an official project.
>

Have a look at the new page I've created and bring your feedback up for 
discussion.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DefiningProjects

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64 at n-man.com

http://www.n-man.com/

LinkedIn:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64

Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!
http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
-- 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20060607/70ebcd31/attachment.bin