Hi Christopher-
Thanks for the mail. I understand your point on the logo (certainly
what the project is doing on advancement is more important than
creating a logo). This was more of a side effort with the benefit of
helping to give the project a visible 'identity' which sometimes helps
people to rally around the project.
Thanks again for the comment, and we're on to discussing
a project 'roadmap'.
-Jim
On May 19, 2007, at 3:50 AM, Christopher G. Stach II wrote:
Jukka Zitting wrote:
Hi,
On 5/19/07, Shane Curcuru (JIRA) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks for following up on logo guidelines!
[...]
- Shane, via prc@
To anyone wondering, I asked the Public Relations Committee
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for feedback on the proposed logo. The response was
positive, so we're good to go if we want to start using the logo.
BR,
Jukka Zitting
I don't want to demean any work that anyone has accomplished, and I
guess that a LOGO is great (no turtle!), but how about laying out a
timeline or a prioritized list of requirements? Few people care if it
looks more like a brook than a stream.
--
Christopher G. Stach II
