Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 04:48, Pascal Terjan wrote:
>> Francisco Alcaraz wrote:

[...]

>
>>> Mandrake should be more carefull with this, shouldn't it?
>
>> I'm pretty sure the magazine didn't even bother to tell Mandrakesoft
>> they'll distibute the 9.2...
>
> OK... I'm planning to include a slightly-less-than-single-ISO version of 
> 9.2 plus the updates and an LG-proof kernel on the cover of an 
> Australian magazine. It will be aimed at a single purpose: installing a 
> secure, database-backed Mandrake Linux webserver/mailserver/gateway 
> machine for developers to use either for real or as a staging area or 
> an intranet server/testbed.
>
> What are the rules Mandrake would like me to follow?
>
> For example, if I include a PLF package or the NVidia/ATI drivers, what 
> must I change? The distro's name? Licence terms?
>
> What can I do with the advertising screens? Are Mandrake happy for me to 
> add extra images to the sequence, one to loudly remind the audience 
> that this is not an official Mandrake distribution - it's been built 
> for the magazine - one to advertise Linux contacts in Australia, and so 
> on?
>
> What else?

The main issue is "Would this be a good ad for Mandrakesoft?".

If you built bad quality bugged CDs with Mandrake name, the people will
say that mandrake is crap.

Maybe just add a notice that they are not official mandrake CDs.

-- 
Warly

Reply via email to