Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
Hi, On 11/22/2013 01:33 PM, Allan Day wrote: > Ubuntu GNOME isn't solely a product of the GNOME > project, so I don't t think it's accurate to use the GNOME logo alone. > In fact, I think that a different logo would be beneficial for the > Ubuntu GNOME project, since it would help them to make themselves > recognisable. I disagree with this. I think it does a disservice to GNOME not to include Ubuntu GNOME in how we think of the GNOME project, and community. It *is* GNOME, and the people who package it are part of the GNOME project - to make them go through a "differentiation" process is only going to reinforce for them that they are not seen as part of GNOME. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary, Lyon, France Email: dne...@gnome.org Jabber: nea...@gmail.com ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:59 AM, Andreas Nilsson wrote: > On 11/21/2013 05:03 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: > >> I had no idea there was even an engagement list. Was it announced on >> this list? >> >> Why was a redirect put in place? It comes off as very aggressive. >> >> Why not have a placeholder page that has a link to the new page, so that >> the history is still accessible? I have no clue how you dug up that >> cloud.gnome.org link, how does one look something like that up? How >> would a layman researching GNOME's brand history come across that? >> Certainly not through Google, I tried! >> >> And what of the OPW intern's work? >> > > Yu's work was completed, and that was a good internship, but I haven't > made too much use of the guidelines in the materials I've created of late. > I think she did some work herself for GNOME Asia based upon it though. > I kind of sucked as a mentor in that round and was unable to properly push > her in the visual direction that I felt fitted with the rest of our work > and then I kind of ended up not using that too much... > :/ I use Yu's slide templates in talks pretty often. They have a different feel from our standard materials, but I use them anyway :) Especially for presentations related to outreach, since they match the theme used in the cartoon and poster materials. Meg > > - Andreas > > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
On Nov 22, 2013 7:33 AM, "Allan Day" wrote: > > Vincent Untz wrote: > ... > >> Yeah, so the thing that I think we really miss is some examples of > >> what is cool to do. Like examples of t-shirts and stickers, and > >> original designs based on the logo. My understanding is that this > >> would require some work from the board... > > > > What about all the goodies we had at FOSDEM and GUADEC in the last 7 or > > 8 years? :-) > > There are certainly good examples that we can use there. The trick > will be to make sure that the guidelines and the examples are aligned, > of course. > > Again, I think that a more detailed set of visual identity guidelines > would help here, since it will enable us to articulate a common style. > It might be worth holding off making any major updates to the existing > guidelines until that's done. > > >> Right now the guidelines are pretty unfriendly (especially the > >> guidelines for third parties, which is one of the things I don't like > >> about them) and only really cover what you can't do, rather than what > >> you can. The new page I wrote makes an effort to do away with as much > >> unfriendliness as possible, but could be more welcoming and > >> accessible. > > > > Just to give an example of what we do in openSUSE: > > http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines > > > > To be clear, this page is clearly not the most friendly page out there > > (too complex), but it explicitly gives many examples of what can be done > > without requesting permission. > > I agree. Examples are good. > > >> >> In the Ubuntu GNOME case, I think it's fair to ask about the logo, > >> >> irrespective of the trademark guidelines. Their logo [1] is > >> >> essentially the same as the GNOME logo itself; some differentiation > >> >> seems beneficial for both them and us. We don't have to be unfriendly > >> >> about it, but then a dialogue about how they can help to support the > >> >> GNOME brand doesn't seem like a bad thing. > >> > > >> > Of course it's fair, but to be honest, I'm fine with them using our > >> > logo. Fedora and openSUSE both use our logo too: > >> > http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-options#desktops > >> > http://software.opensuse.org/131/en > >> > > >> > Sure, the context is slightly different, because you see all the flavors > >> > on the same page for Fedora and openSUSE, while it's not the case for > >> > Ubuntu GNOME. But it feels the same. > >> > >> The seem like different types of cases to me, to be honest. Using the > >> GNOME foot as a logo for an independent project seems of a different > >> type to indicating that GNOME is featured in a piece of software. (The > >> latter is stated as fair use by the third party guidelines, fwiw.) > > > > Here's the thing: I don't see Ubuntu GNOME as an independent project, > > but as the result of the work of the GNOME team in Ubuntu, in very much > > the same way the GNOME team in openSUSE is able to produce a pretty good > > openSUSE+GNOME-based live image. And quoting their wiki page: "Ubuntu > > GNOME is an official flavour of Ubuntu, featuring the GNOME desktop > > environment." [1] That seams to match pretty well what you wrote above > > about Fedora and openSUSE. > > > > And really, coming back to one of my initial feeling: I actually want > > them to use our logo so they can help promote GNOME! > > Of course Ubuntu GNOME can use the GNOME logo, and they can have a > logo which itself includes the GNOME logo. In doing so, they can > articulate that they work in collaboration with GNOME, and they can > help to promote the GNOME project. > > A logo should communicate the identity of the project (or the product) > to which it belongs. Ubuntu GNOME isn't solely a product of the GNOME > project, so I don't t think it's accurate to use the GNOME logo alone. > In fact, I think that a different logo would be beneficial for the > Ubuntu GNOME project, since it would help them to make themselves > recognisable. So, ubuntu gnome csn use the logo, it just has to be 'more different' ?? How much different? ? As I recall the name ubuntu gnome was picked in conjunction with the gnome project, so hopefully no-one now has an issue with it. Its just the logo. And yet its a pretty standard ubuntu logo of a different project, if you consider the logos for kubuntu or xubuntu. > > Allan ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
On 11/21/2013 05:03 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote: I had no idea there was even an engagement list. Was it announced on this list? Why was a redirect put in place? It comes off as very aggressive. Why not have a placeholder page that has a link to the new page, so that the history is still accessible? I have no clue how you dug up that cloud.gnome.org link, how does one look something like that up? How would a layman researching GNOME's brand history come across that? Certainly not through Google, I tried! And what of the OPW intern's work? Yu's work was completed, and that was a good internship, but I haven't made too much use of the guidelines in the materials I've created of late. I think she did some work herself for GNOME Asia based upon it though. I kind of sucked as a mentor in that round and was unable to properly push her in the visual direction that I felt fitted with the rest of our work and then I kind of ended up not using that too much... :/ - Andreas ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
On 11/21/2013 11:58 AM, Dave Neary wrote: Hi Allan, On 11/21/2013 11:04 AM, Allan Day wrote: That page is pretty new. The intention was to consolidate the pre-existing guidelines, but there's a chance that some of the issues you mention are simply bugs that need to be ironed out. This raises a very important point. Mairin worked on logo & brand guidelines back in 2006. That was the work (I believe that you based this page off. And all of the links to her work are now broken and point at this page. The archive is gone. The history is gone. We are losing collected collective wisdom at al alarming rate in the GNOME project as people (like myself) become less active and old wiki pages get deleted wholesale as we move to new infrastructure and the content gets "refreshed". I don't think this is a good thing, but if it's a conscious decision that's one thing. If it's collateral damage and is happening unawares, then it's more serious (and consider this to be calling attention to it). Mairin's work was excellent. I'm very, very thankful for having the vertical logo as a direct outcome of that work. Thank you Mairin! However, as one of the people making most use of the logo in various printed and web materials, I really appreciate the newer, shorter guidelines (that built upon the old guidelines, so no history is lost per se). One thing that the new guidelines makes away with is the internal spacing of the logo itself. As that is included in the logo svg file anyway, I think that's ok to skip if it makes the document easier to access. I really never made use of the color variations, but that is just me. Others might have different experiences. I also appreciate having some history in the wiki, but at the same time there is a lot of old and outdated stuff in the wiki to the point where I have a very hard time finding stuff. I'm sometimes too afraid to delete stuff, because someone might find it useful, even though it conflicts with other stuff. What is best practice here? How would you do it? - Andreas ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
Vincent Untz wrote: ... >> Yeah, so the thing that I think we really miss is some examples of >> what is cool to do. Like examples of t-shirts and stickers, and >> original designs based on the logo. My understanding is that this >> would require some work from the board... > > What about all the goodies we had at FOSDEM and GUADEC in the last 7 or > 8 years? :-) There are certainly good examples that we can use there. The trick will be to make sure that the guidelines and the examples are aligned, of course. Again, I think that a more detailed set of visual identity guidelines would help here, since it will enable us to articulate a common style. It might be worth holding off making any major updates to the existing guidelines until that's done. >> Right now the guidelines are pretty unfriendly (especially the >> guidelines for third parties, which is one of the things I don't like >> about them) and only really cover what you can't do, rather than what >> you can. The new page I wrote makes an effort to do away with as much >> unfriendliness as possible, but could be more welcoming and >> accessible. > > Just to give an example of what we do in openSUSE: > http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines > > To be clear, this page is clearly not the most friendly page out there > (too complex), but it explicitly gives many examples of what can be done > without requesting permission. I agree. Examples are good. >> >> In the Ubuntu GNOME case, I think it's fair to ask about the logo, >> >> irrespective of the trademark guidelines. Their logo [1] is >> >> essentially the same as the GNOME logo itself; some differentiation >> >> seems beneficial for both them and us. We don't have to be unfriendly >> >> about it, but then a dialogue about how they can help to support the >> >> GNOME brand doesn't seem like a bad thing. >> > >> > Of course it's fair, but to be honest, I'm fine with them using our >> > logo. Fedora and openSUSE both use our logo too: >> > http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-options#desktops >> > http://software.opensuse.org/131/en >> > >> > Sure, the context is slightly different, because you see all the flavors >> > on the same page for Fedora and openSUSE, while it's not the case for >> > Ubuntu GNOME. But it feels the same. >> >> The seem like different types of cases to me, to be honest. Using the >> GNOME foot as a logo for an independent project seems of a different >> type to indicating that GNOME is featured in a piece of software. (The >> latter is stated as fair use by the third party guidelines, fwiw.) > > Here's the thing: I don't see Ubuntu GNOME as an independent project, > but as the result of the work of the GNOME team in Ubuntu, in very much > the same way the GNOME team in openSUSE is able to produce a pretty good > openSUSE+GNOME-based live image. And quoting their wiki page: "Ubuntu > GNOME is an official flavour of Ubuntu, featuring the GNOME desktop > environment." [1] That seams to match pretty well what you wrote above > about Fedora and openSUSE. > > And really, coming back to one of my initial feeling: I actually want > them to use our logo so they can help promote GNOME! Of course Ubuntu GNOME can use the GNOME logo, and they can have a logo which itself includes the GNOME logo. In doing so, they can articulate that they work in collaboration with GNOME, and they can help to promote the GNOME project. A logo should communicate the identity of the project (or the product) to which it belongs. Ubuntu GNOME isn't solely a product of the GNOME project, so I don't t think it's accurate to use the GNOME logo alone. In fact, I think that a different logo would be beneficial for the Ubuntu GNOME project, since it would help them to make themselves recognisable. Allan ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:06 AM, Vincent Untz wrote: > Hi, > > Le jeudi 21 novembre 2013, à 12:17 +, Allan Day a écrit : >> Vincent Untz wrote: >> >> Do we have examples of the guidelines "hurting us"? >> > >> > I can think of groups simply choosing to not use the GNOME logo anymore >> > because they're afraid of not respecting the guidelines. >> >> I'd be interested in the specifics here. Could you send me contact >> details for the groups concerned? > > I'd start with all the local groups that we have (see > https://wiki.gnome.org/UserGroups -- it's likely outdated, though) and > our downstreams (contact would be distributor-list). > >> > If I was >> > completely new to the community, and I'd read the guidelines, I'd simply >> > think that it's simpler to not use the logo at all. I'd not even ask... >> > >> > This hurts because I can imagine local groups not doing stickers, >> > flyers, etc. because they'd be afraid of the guidelines. Back in the >> > days when we started GNOME-FR, there were no guidelines so we went crazy >> > and did many different things; we wouldn't have done all that with the >> > current guidelines. >> >> Yeah, so the thing that I think we really miss is some examples of >> what is cool to do. Like examples of t-shirts and stickers, and >> original designs based on the logo. My understanding is that this >> would require some work from the board... > > What about all the goodies we had at FOSDEM and GUADEC in the last 7 or > 8 years? :-) > >> Right now the guidelines are pretty unfriendly (especially the >> guidelines for third parties, which is one of the things I don't like >> about them) and only really cover what you can't do, rather than what >> you can. The new page I wrote makes an effort to do away with as much >> unfriendliness as possible, but could be more welcoming and >> accessible. > > Just to give an example of what we do in openSUSE: > http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines > > To be clear, this page is clearly not the most friendly page out there > (too complex), but it explicitly gives many examples of what can be done > without requesting permission. > >> >> In the Ubuntu GNOME case, I think it's fair to ask about the logo, >> >> irrespective of the trademark guidelines. Their logo [1] is >> >> essentially the same as the GNOME logo itself; some differentiation >> >> seems beneficial for both them and us. We don't have to be unfriendly >> >> about it, but then a dialogue about how they can help to support the >> >> GNOME brand doesn't seem like a bad thing. >> > >> > Of course it's fair, but to be honest, I'm fine with them using our >> > logo. Fedora and openSUSE both use our logo too: >> > http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-options#desktops >> > http://software.opensuse.org/131/en >> > >> > Sure, the context is slightly different, because you see all the flavors >> > on the same page for Fedora and openSUSE, while it's not the case for >> > Ubuntu GNOME. But it feels the same. >> >> The seem like different types of cases to me, to be honest. Using the >> GNOME foot as a logo for an independent project seems of a different >> type to indicating that GNOME is featured in a piece of software. (The >> latter is stated as fair use by the third party guidelines, fwiw.) > > Here's the thing: I don't see Ubuntu GNOME as an independent project, > but as the result of the work of the GNOME team in Ubuntu, in very much > the same way the GNOME team in openSUSE is able to produce a pretty good > openSUSE+GNOME-based live image. And quoting their wiki page: "Ubuntu > GNOME is an official flavour of Ubuntu, featuring the GNOME desktop > environment." [1] That seams to match pretty well what you wrote above > about Fedora and openSUSE. > > And really, coming back to one of my initial feeling: I actually want > them to use our logo so they can help promote GNOME! > Exactly. I really don't understand whats not to like about Ubuntu GNOME promoting the fact that if you use Ubuntu and you want GNOME (as many of us do), there's a ready-made flavor for you. Ubuntu GNOME is promoting GNOME - how/why is that a bad thing? > Cheers, > > Vincent > > [1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGNOME > > -- > Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. > ___ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list -- Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. - Goethe Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr.Seuss Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted. - Albert Einstein ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Minutes of the Board meeting of October 29th, 2013
Hi, Le jeudi 21 novembre 2013, à 12:17 +, Allan Day a écrit : > Vincent Untz wrote: > >> Do we have examples of the guidelines "hurting us"? > > > > I can think of groups simply choosing to not use the GNOME logo anymore > > because they're afraid of not respecting the guidelines. > > I'd be interested in the specifics here. Could you send me contact > details for the groups concerned? I'd start with all the local groups that we have (see https://wiki.gnome.org/UserGroups -- it's likely outdated, though) and our downstreams (contact would be distributor-list). > > If I was > > completely new to the community, and I'd read the guidelines, I'd simply > > think that it's simpler to not use the logo at all. I'd not even ask... > > > > This hurts because I can imagine local groups not doing stickers, > > flyers, etc. because they'd be afraid of the guidelines. Back in the > > days when we started GNOME-FR, there were no guidelines so we went crazy > > and did many different things; we wouldn't have done all that with the > > current guidelines. > > Yeah, so the thing that I think we really miss is some examples of > what is cool to do. Like examples of t-shirts and stickers, and > original designs based on the logo. My understanding is that this > would require some work from the board... What about all the goodies we had at FOSDEM and GUADEC in the last 7 or 8 years? :-) > Right now the guidelines are pretty unfriendly (especially the > guidelines for third parties, which is one of the things I don't like > about them) and only really cover what you can't do, rather than what > you can. The new page I wrote makes an effort to do away with as much > unfriendliness as possible, but could be more welcoming and > accessible. Just to give an example of what we do in openSUSE: http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Trademark_guidelines To be clear, this page is clearly not the most friendly page out there (too complex), but it explicitly gives many examples of what can be done without requesting permission. > >> In the Ubuntu GNOME case, I think it's fair to ask about the logo, > >> irrespective of the trademark guidelines. Their logo [1] is > >> essentially the same as the GNOME logo itself; some differentiation > >> seems beneficial for both them and us. We don't have to be unfriendly > >> about it, but then a dialogue about how they can help to support the > >> GNOME brand doesn't seem like a bad thing. > > > > Of course it's fair, but to be honest, I'm fine with them using our > > logo. Fedora and openSUSE both use our logo too: > > http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-options#desktops > > http://software.opensuse.org/131/en > > > > Sure, the context is slightly different, because you see all the flavors > > on the same page for Fedora and openSUSE, while it's not the case for > > Ubuntu GNOME. But it feels the same. > > The seem like different types of cases to me, to be honest. Using the > GNOME foot as a logo for an independent project seems of a different > type to indicating that GNOME is featured in a piece of software. (The > latter is stated as fair use by the third party guidelines, fwiw.) Here's the thing: I don't see Ubuntu GNOME as an independent project, but as the result of the work of the GNOME team in Ubuntu, in very much the same way the GNOME team in openSUSE is able to produce a pretty good openSUSE+GNOME-based live image. And quoting their wiki page: "Ubuntu GNOME is an official flavour of Ubuntu, featuring the GNOME desktop environment." [1] That seams to match pretty well what you wrote above about Fedora and openSUSE. And really, coming back to one of my initial feeling: I actually want them to use our logo so they can help promote GNOME! Cheers, Vincent [1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuGNOME -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
