draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Jan 29, 2008 6:52 PM, Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:58:22 -0500 (EST)
> Max Spevack <mspevack at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > What else?  Is the objective that I'm looking for clear?
>
> There should be a very compelling reason to call it "Fedora".  Because
> of our draconian trademark policy it becomes rather hard to rid the
> distro of the term "Fedora", and once you apply the Fedora name to
> something, they'll likely want to use the logo, and then we run into
> logo issues, etc, etc...
>
> I'd really like to hear a strong compelling reason to apply the term
> Fedora to a set of code, which by all rights we should be trying to get
> used in other distributions.
>

Yeah respins and downstreams become a complete pain in the arse. The
issue would be that if you came up with an alternative name to help
keep things in check as in 'bowler-directory-server', 'bowler-images'
does someone then say it need to be trademarked etc etc.

Actually maybe for Fedora X we can have a set of 'official'
alternative packages called bowler-X, so that respins would be able to
use them without incurring the Wrath of K'lawyer.

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"