draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Jan 29, 2008 7:48 PM, Max Spevack <mspevack at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> >> 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.
> >
> > +1
>
> To me, this last requirement falls into "The Fedora Board has to think
> it's a good idea."  Maybe that should simply be step 1 in the process,
> to save potentially wasting other people's time/effort.
>

Well actually steps 1-4 look to be what would be needed for something
that doesnt need a fedora name but is a large import. The other big
thing that I can see needing is a training/mentoring process on step
4. Some tutorials on how the Fedora politics works, how the patch
system works, what the 6-7 month timeline is like and how the project
needs to be aware of that... etc.

-- 
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"