[fab] Fedora Logo Proposal

[Paul W. Frields]

On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 08:57 -0500, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-08-07 at 18:25 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> 
> >   * People who are redistributing something based on Fedora, but who are 
> > NOT following the above redistribution guidelines, may NOT use the Fedora 
> > logo.  If they choose to use the text "based on Fedora," we won't stop 
> > them.
> 
> While I don't disagree with anything in this policy, Aurora would not be
> permitted to use the Fedora logo as we are simply taking Fedora universe
> packages, patching for sparc, and adding sparc specific OSS utils.
> 
> Not that I care too much (we're not really _using_ the logo today), but
> it is worth pointing out.

As much as I think we'd like to automate the heck out of this process so
we don't bottleneck anything, would it be worth having an appeal clause
like Jabber uses, so we can review and approve some otherwise unapproved
usage?  spot's doing the kind of thing we generally encourage as far as
the FOSS ideals.  Or maybe we're missing another item in the list.

This may be a stupid (and Pandoraesque) question, so I'll apologize up
front for it, but it's honest at least:  why is Aurora not part of
Fedora, as far as providing build tools, CVS space and such?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20060808/40cb05a6/attachment.sig>