Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-features (86 mails)

< Previous Next >
[openFATE 311039] Review of openSUSE Trademark Guidelines
Feature changed by: Alberto Passalacqua (GreenGeeko)
Feature #311039, revision 3
Title: Review of openSUSE Trademark Guidelines

openSUSE.org: Unconfirmed
Priority
Requester: Important

Requested by: Bryen Yunashko (byunashko)
Partner organization: openSUSE.org

Description:
This feature request is meant to collect the comments of the community
at large The current guidlines can be found here
http://en.opensuse.org/OpenSUSE_Trademark_Guidelines
(http://en.opensuse.org/OpenSUSE_Trademark_Guidelines)
The openSUSE Board will review comments posted here along with concerns
and considerations collected elsewhere and find ways to
strengthen/clarify the guidelines.
Please review the current guidelines and post comments on language.
(Giving specific language change suggestions is helpful) and if you
have specific cases where current guidelines have been a problem,
please post here as well.

+ Discussion:
+ #1: Alberto Passalacqua (greengeeko) (2011-01-06 17:54:32)
+ Hello,
+ first of all, thank you for bringing this problem up. I feel it blocks
+ contributions concerning derivatives, or, at least, it did with me.
+ My major concern is the section "Distributing openSUSE With Project-
+ Based Modifications". According to this section, a distribution with
+ only openSUSE packages created in Studio must be de-branded, if one
+ package has been added to the default installation. This basically
+ translates in de-branding all the distributions created in Studio,
+ since they do not reflect the default installation pattern.
+ I would also suggest to create a review process for the "Distributing
+ openSUSE With All Other Modification" section. I try to explain this
+ with an example. Let us assume I create a default openSUSE system, and
+ I add an open source (GPL or compatible) application with file overlay,
+ and I would like to create a derivative within the openSUSE project
+ (like, for example, openSUSE medical, which did it, but it is not clear
+ how). This could be very positive marketing for openSUSE, and would
+ potentially help in attracting more user, and pay back a bit of the
+ resources offered through Studio and OBS.
+ The review process should be simple: a set of a few clear requirements
+ the contributor has to follow (for example: only GPL, no profit, no
+ copyright infringment, ...), and the approval should be granted by the
+ board or automatically, with the possibility of ask for changes to
+ comply. Please, no long lists of rules, because it just would not cut
+ it ;-)
+ Best,
+ Alberto




--
openSUSE Feature:
https://features.opensuse.org/311039

< Previous Next >
List Navigation
This Thread