Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013

On Nov 22, 2013 7:33 AM, "Allan Day" <allanpday gmail com> wrote:
> Vincent Untz <vuntz gnome org> wrote:
> ...
> >> Yeah, so the thing that I think we really miss is some examples of
> >> what is cool to do. Like examples of t-shirts and stickers, and
> >> original designs based on the logo. My understanding is that this
> >> would require some work from the board...
> >
> > What about all the goodies we had at FOSDEM and GUADEC in the last 7 or
> > 8 years? :-)
> There are certainly good examples that we can use there. The trick
> will be to make sure that the guidelines and the examples are aligned,
> of course.
> Again, I think that a more detailed set of visual identity guidelines
> would help here, since it will enable us to articulate a common style.
> It might be worth holding off making any major updates to the existing
> guidelines until that's done.
> >> Right now the guidelines are pretty unfriendly (especially the
> >> guidelines for third parties, which is one of the things I don't like
> >> about them) and only really cover what you can't do, rather than what
> >> you can. The new page I wrote makes an effort to do away with as much
> >> unfriendliness as possible, but could be more welcoming and
> >> accessible.
> >
> > Just to give an example of what we do in openSUSE:
> >
> >
> > To be clear, this page is clearly not the most friendly page out there
> > (too complex), but it explicitly gives many examples of what can be done
> > without requesting permission.
> I agree. Examples are good.
> >> >> In the Ubuntu GNOME case, I think it's fair to ask about the logo,
> >> >> irrespective of the trademark guidelines. Their logo [1] is
> >> >> essentially the same as the GNOME logo itself; some differentiation
> >> >> seems beneficial for both them and us. We don't have to be unfriendly
> >> >> about it, but then a dialogue about how they can help to support the
> >> >> GNOME brand doesn't seem like a bad thing.
> >> >
> >> > Of course it's fair, but to be honest, I'm fine with them using our
> >> > logo. Fedora and openSUSE both use our logo too:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Sure, the context is slightly different, because you see all the flavors
> >> > on the same page for Fedora and openSUSE, while it's not the case for
> >> > Ubuntu GNOME. But it feels the same.
> >>
> >> The seem like different types of cases to me, to be honest.  Using the
> >> GNOME foot as a logo for an independent project seems of a different
> >> type to indicating that GNOME is featured in a piece of software. (The
> >> latter is stated as fair use by the third party guidelines, fwiw.)
> >
> > Here's the thing: I don't see Ubuntu GNOME as an independent project,
> > but as the result of the work of the GNOME team in Ubuntu, in very much
> > the same way the GNOME team in openSUSE is able to produce a pretty good
> > openSUSE+GNOME-based live image. And quoting their wiki page: "Ubuntu
> > GNOME is an official flavour of Ubuntu, featuring the GNOME desktop
> > environment." [1] That seams to match pretty well what you wrote above
> > about Fedora and openSUSE.
> >
> > And really, coming back to one of my initial feeling: I actually want
> > them to use our logo so they can help promote GNOME!
> Of course Ubuntu GNOME can use the GNOME logo, and they can have a
> logo which itself includes the GNOME logo. In doing so, they can
> articulate that they work in collaboration with GNOME, and they can
> help to promote the GNOME project.
> A logo should communicate the identity of the project (or the product)
> to which it belongs. Ubuntu GNOME isn't solely a product of the GNOME
> project, so I don't t think it's accurate to use the GNOME logo alone.
> In fact, I think that a different logo would be beneficial for the
> Ubuntu GNOME project, since it would help them to make themselves
> recognisable.

So, ubuntu gnome csn use the logo, it just has to be 'more different' ??

How much different? ? As I recall the name ubuntu gnome was picked in conjunction with the gnome project, so hopefully no-one now has an issue with it. Its just the logo. And yet its a pretty standard ubuntu logo of a different project, if you consider the logos for kubuntu or xubuntu. 

> Allan
> foundation-list mailing list
> foundation-list gnome org

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]