On 01/02/17 21:38, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote:
But, let me ask something, what the foundation really wants to achieve
with this ? Cause I think we are conflating two things here: A logo (or
brand) and a mascot.
I think this is an excellent point. The constraints on logos make a lot
of sense *for logos*, but it'll be very hard to achieve something like
Pixie Boots within them. Could we perhaps use *two* images for different
contexts?
1) a stylized logo, matching the guidelines, for use in "official"
settings and anywhere that it will be seen alongside other projects' logos;
2) our existing Pixie Boots mascot, for use in "unofficial" settings
(laptop stickers, T-shirts, chatbots, The Bear Metal Adventures of Pixie
Boots webcomic series*, etc, etc).
It'll be much easier to agree on image 1 if we don't reject every
proposal for not capturing every nuance of image 2.
If that makes sense, I have a suggestion for the next iteration of the
logo, if one is needed: take the head from logo version 3.0. AFAICT,
that meets all the objections raised so far:
- it's simple and logo-like,
- it's not holding any man-made objects,
- it's friendly,
- it has heavy-metal facial markings,
- it's not making any potentially-obscene gestures.
It doesn't look exactly like Pixie Boots, but if we can carry on using
Pixie in unofficial contexts, that shouldn't be a problem.
Miles
* In which Pixie Boots, sysadmin by day and rock musician by night,
solves a series of increasingly baffling deployment problems using
AWESOME DRUM SOLOS.
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
