draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora

[Matt Domsch]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 02:51:56PM -0500, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> On 01/30/2008 02:07 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> >On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:58 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> >>Perhaps its a simple as requiring projects have a existing brand
> >>neutral project name, but we allow them to use a tag like:
> >> "Brought to you by the Fedora project", or "A Fedora Project snafu"
> >
> >*shrug*  if someone wants to point out that the project is
> >hosted/supported/driven forward by work within Fedora, that's fine, but
> >I'm not sure what a "brought to you by Fedora" really brings.  But I
> >could just be missing something
> 
> It really doesn't.  If people patch our stuff, it's really not brought 
> to you by the letters F-E-D-O-R-A anymore.


This is the whole Mozilla / IceWeazel fight all over again.

What's the benefit to the software packages to being called "Fedora
Whatever"?  Usually looking to achieve quicker status / recognition,
and maybe wider adoption, by piggybacking on the status of the Fedora
brand.  In most cases, that's not justifiable.

What's the benefit to the Fedora Project of that thing being called
"Fedora Whatever"?  Looking to demonstrate that more software
originates from Fedora I suppose...  That's tenuous - look at 'Oracle
Enterprise Linux, now with improved code from Red Hat Enterprise Linux
and Xen (enhance by us) by Citrix/XenSource, made by ex-Novell gurus'.
How much of those other name are mentioned (or legally can be
mentioned)?  None.

Implementations of projects for Fedora, such as "Fedora MirrorManager"
make sense.  Branding the software as such, instead of just
"MirrorManager", doesn't make sense.

-Matt