I am new and an outsider, but I have to say that the accusations,
insinuations, and anger around this is really not a good look. I have
been using Linux since the mid 90's. There have been too many fights
that split the community in that time. My thoughts, anyway.
I found an issue with postfix and gmail that I was going to debug and
fix over the holidays (an email to factory a few weeks ago). That is,
I was about to become a contributor. Now, I am rethinking whether this
is the right community to land. There are lots of topics to debate
(e.g., security or user experience). A logo doesn't seem to rise to
that level to me. The process seems more important but, on that, I
don't know enough to render an opinion. However, I appeal to
everyone...please don't make this personal. I have seen too much of
that in the past thirty years.
--
Tony Walker
On 2023-12-08 10:18, Douglas DeMaio wrote:
Perhaps waiting for the results might be wise. Or being there when it's going to be discussed. Perception aren't facts; it's just an opinion/slant on thing with multiple perspectives. Everyone has an opinion and the slant usually comes from ones own point of view. People had an opportunity to participate or comment on the notes. No one submitted the 2005 logo as was mentioned in the article and wiki.
Nobody could submit the 2005 logo without breaking the rules that explicitly prohibited existing trademarks being submitted
Pointing to something after the fact is fine and I'm certain it will work itself out. But words to portray a narrative that is critical about an open process isn't something I agree with. Some people may feel that way, but that doesn't mean others feel same. I certainly don't, and I would like to see a change rather than a narrative that some might view as "stagnation".
Have a look at every single reddit, telegram, twitter, or matrix discussion on the topic and you will find words from others than myself also either echoing similar concerns or just outright disliking the idea of changing the logo. I find this latest email from you to be obscenely patronising and unbecoming of an openSUSE Board member who is meant to represent the wishes of the Project as a whole, and especially it's voting membership.
And with the trademark aspects, that statement is there for a reason. The phrase "If you don't know, you better ask somebody" isn't just military jargon. Silence on the trademark for the month between the submissions and time to vote isn't being railroaded in my opinion; there was certainly a sufficient amount of time.
It took several years from initiating discussions on trademarking Kubic before it progressed. As I have repeatedly pointed out on several other venues, every single change, alteration, or addition to the openSUSE trademark has also been a process lasting several years. If you think a month is a good time for a topic of this complexity, then frankly, I think you're unfit to be driving this matter, and I respectfully request that Gerald take the lead, giving his professional responsibility as Chairperson.
-- Richard Brown Distributions Architect SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstraße 146, D-90461 Nuremberg, Germany (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) Managing Directors/Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev, Andrew McDonald, Werner Knoblich