+1 on logo #3
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 9:45 AM, scott comer <[email protected]> wrote: > ok, so last week we had discussion, the sense it got was that these logos > were enough for a vote. david staudt suggested a combination of (2) and (3) > which i don't entirely understand (please explain david!). let's call that > (4) an have it as a virtual icon. please vote now for (1) through (4). > you've got 48 hours. only committers have a vote, others may express their > opinion. committers are scott, jd, seth, james, rene, guarav, jim, youngjin. > > thanks, > scott out > > > > > >
