Fedora LiveCD : Looking for Betatesters - Port of redhat 9.0base to fedora core 1

[Colin Charles]

On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 22:52, Jef Spaleta wrote:
> >Hmm, Debian is a USA based project, and Knoppix, it's spin-off is
> >based in Germany.
> 
> The KEY to this statement of fact is that Knoppix is spelled differently
> than Debian, and I would hope Knoppix refrains from using Debian's
> trademarks and logos inside the Knoppix isos. There is more than enough
> room for a derivative work that begins with software provided by Fedora
> to create a liveCD that is legal in other countries. BUT, it should not
> use trademarked Fedora images or logos. In fact if you read through the
> trademark guidelines at fedora.redhat.com ... I'm really not sure that
> you should use the Fedora name associated at all, even to say its a
> derivative work, with a livecd that is rolled up outside of the
> 'official' structure. 

Fair enough. I think Dirk Westfal better be reading, lest he lands up in
trouble.

Alan Cox has mentioned that if its worthy, it could be called the
"Fedora LiveCD". Who decides its worthiness?

> What if the LiveCD I roll up..totally sucks? I assure you it would.
> Should I be allowed to say that its based on Fedora Core? I don't think
> so, because my crappy attempt at liveCD building would tarnish the
> official work done as part of the official Fedora community effort.  And
> don't try to argue that people using and reviewing my crappy little
> liveCD should know better than to link the very bad craftmanship of MY
> customized work to the craftsmanship of the Fedora project in general.
> In an effort to avoid tarnishing the reputation of the Fedora name...i
> should NOT be allowed to use or even to refer to Fedora when advertising
> my co-mingled customized liveCD image. In fact... i would suggest(from a
> fairplay point of view) that ALL custom liveCD's should have to live
> outside the allowable usage of the Fedora trademarks because the liveCD
> distribution format makes it very difficult to distiguish what is
> customized and what is original Fedora craftsmanship. Which is very
> different than something like an OEM pre-install, where the OEM can give
> the customer a set of Fedora Core disks as well as a seperate piece of
> media for the OEM addon packages making up the full OEM pre-install of
> Fedora.

Yes, I didn't look at it from this point of view. Naming seems to be
everything these days.

> Of course pulling out ALL the text that refers to the distro as
> Fedora(not to mention all the lingering Red Hat references) is probably
> a non trivial task at the moment....maybe there is room in the
> continuing dialog for an official liveCD image, but somehow i doubt an
> officially blessed liveCD image would fill the niche well, considering
> the non-technical limitations being 'officially' blessed would carry.

Well, to some degree, I guess the LiveCD project is in beta and can't be
"officially" blessed, because it doesn't even run the regular Fedora
kernel. It's a stock kernel with openmosix patches applied.

> -jef"if the point of a liveCD is to demo a distro...but the liveCD ends
> up having many custom features the base distro does not have like ntfs
> support...what's the point again?"spaleta

There exists ntfs read support apparently.

Actually, veering from this, maybe we should be creating a Fedora non-us
archive of sorts? Or is Fedora Extras a project that'll keep the NTFS
stuff, and the non-blessed Core stuff? (currently, that seems to be the
case, with the mplayer/divx/mp3 archives).
-- 
Colin Charles, byte at aeon.com.my
http://www.bytebot.net/