On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Matthew Miller
<mat...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:38:21PM +0000, Sanja Bonic wrote:
>> Note that if we stay on 1 or 2 now, we will have to change at a later point
>> in the future in case we want to introduce FAH and FAW logos (unless
>
> FWIW the current Fedora Atomic Host logo we're using (at least on the
> download page) is
> https://getfedora.org/static/images/atomic-head-logo.png
>

It seems appropriate to vote on the Project Atomic logo on this ML,
but the Fedora Atomic things should go through Fedora processes. Maybe
one of the monday atomic community meetings would be the best place to
discuss this, vs one of the wed meetings, which are about feodra.

It's always been a bit confusing, but Project Atomic proper was
explicitly chartered *not* to distribute an OS, for reasons I don't
think I ever fully understood. But it's always been the Fedora and
CentOS projects (and Red Hat, for RHEL Atomic Host) that have
distributed the actual atomic hosts. Maybe Joe Brockmeier can help
fill in more original context around this.

> See https://getfedora.org/ for how it fits in with the others.
> Presumably if we add an IoT Edition, it'll get the magenta color.
>
> We could talk to Fedora Design about rotating things around so Atomic
> gets the green option....
>
> --
> Matthew Miller
> <mat...@fedoraproject.org>
> Fedora Project Leader
>

Reply via email to