RE: Notes on branding

[Martin Gainty]

Hi Gunnar-
assume you're implementing a custom license you can implement rat-plugin 
configured with custom-license
http://creadur.apache.org/rat/apache-rat-plugin/examples/custom-license.html
when staging for release if all your disclaimers pass rat report can you hook 
to verify phase of the build?
http://creadur.apache.org/rat/apache-rat-plugin/examples/verify.html
/Tack/
Martin 
__ 

 


> From: tapper.gun...@gmail.com
> Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 23:58:09 -0600
> Subject: Re: Notes on branding
> To: general@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org
> 
> Changes made to the trafodion website:
> 
> 1. Moved disclaimer text to about section rather than in footer.
> 2. Added disclaimer to latest version of documentation.
> 3. Linked incubator logo to incubator.apache.org
> 
> With this, I hope that the trafodion website matches all desired branding
> policies for an incubator project? http://trafodion.incubator.apache.org
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gunnar
> 
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > OK, I'll fix that when I get a chance.
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
> > dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On the other hand, it would be great were the Apache Incubator image
> >> linked to something better than http://trafodion.apache.org [;<).
> >>
> >> As a general observation, the fine print mentioning of Incubator would
> >> also serve folks better if there was a link as part of the Incubator
> >> mention.
> >>
> >> http://incubator.apache.org in both cases seems good enough.
> >>
> >> No voting required.
> >>
> >>  - Dennis
> >>
> >> > -Original Message-
> >> > From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com]
> >> > Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2016 00:05
> >> > To: general@incubator.apache.org
> >> > Subject: Re: Notes on branding
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > FYI, "Apache Trafodion" is part of the logo. I'm not putting the
> >> > project
> >> > > through another round of voting on that one. :)
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Wouldn't suggest that either.
> >> >
> >> > What I was noting was that the text above the log and the text in the
> >> > logo
> >> > were kind of redundant.
> >> >
> >> > I sympathize with not wanting to make low priority changes. This was
> >> > just a
> >> > note.
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gunnar
> > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gunnar
> *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
  

Re: Notes on branding

[Gunnar Tapper]

Changes made to the trafodion website:

1. Moved disclaimer text to about section rather than in footer.
2. Added disclaimer to latest version of documentation.
3. Linked incubator logo to incubator.apache.org

With this, I hope that the trafodion website matches all desired branding
policies for an incubator project? http://trafodion.incubator.apache.org

Thanks,

Gunnar

On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> OK, I'll fix that when I get a chance.
>
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
> dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> On the other hand, it would be great were the Apache Incubator image
>> linked to something better than http://trafodion.apache.org [;<).
>>
>> As a general observation, the fine print mentioning of Incubator would
>> also serve folks better if there was a link as part of the Incubator
>> mention.
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org in both cases seems good enough.
>>
>> No voting required.
>>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> > -Original Message-
>> > From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com]
>> > Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2016 00:05
>> > To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> > Subject: Re: Notes on branding
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > FYI, "Apache Trafodion" is part of the logo. I'm not putting the
>> > project
>> > > through another round of voting on that one. :)
>> > >
>> >
>> > Wouldn't suggest that either.
>> >
>> > What I was noting was that the text above the log and the text in the
>> > logo
>> > were kind of redundant.
>> >
>> > I sympathize with not wanting to make low priority changes. This was
>> > just a
>> > note.
>>
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
> *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>



-- 
Thanks,

Gunnar
*If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*

Re: Notes on branding

[Myrle Krantz]

Whew. : o)  Thanks for the clarification John.


*Myrle Krantz*
Solutions Architect
RɅĐɅЯ, The Mifos Initiative
mkra...@mifos.org | Skype: mkrantz.mifos.org | http://mifos.org
<http://facebook.com/mifos>  <http://www.twitter.com/mifos>


On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 12:50 PM, John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>
wrote:

> On Jul 4, 2016 06:40, "Myrle Krantz" <mkra...@mifos.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > The Fineract site was "dinged" for having the logo and the disclaimer
> > "buried deep within website".
>
> Unless you were contacted by me to change something in the website, you
> have not been dinged.
>
> They are both at the bottom.  But the text
> > "(incubating)" is at the top right next to the text "Apache Fineract".
> In
> > fact, as a result of where it's positioned, the text "(incubating)" shows
> > up as part of the title in google search results.  Putting the incubating
> > logo at the bottom of the site was purely an aesthetic choice, made after
> > we checked out the website both on a laptop screen and on a mobile
> screen.
> > The decision was not made with the intention to obscure.  As to the
> > disclaimer, where else would you put a disclaimer, but at the bottom?
> >
> > I personally feel that the Fineract website follows both the spirit and
> the
> > letter of the law when it comes to displaying its incubating status.  It
> > seems from this Audit result though that the IPMC disagrees with me on
> > this, which makes me doubt that I understand the spirit of the law.  Or
> > perhaps I'm just misunderstanding the audit?
> >
> > In any case, the contributors to Fineract are in it for humanitarian
> > reasons; we don't want to subvert intentions here. If we've got something
> > wrong, we'd very much appreciate further guidance.
> >
> > Also if Apache is going to redesign the logo (+1 non-binding from me on
> > that one), I hope we keep mobile screens in mind while designing.  It's a
> > corner case for an open source project, but nonetheless, many of our
> > intended beneficiaries are lucky if they have even a smart phone.
> >
> > Greetings from the Voreifel, Germany
> > Myrle
> >
> >
> > *Myrle Krantz*
> > Solutions Architect
> > RɅĐɅЯ, The Mifos Initiative
> > mkra...@mifos.org | Skype: mkrantz.mifos.org | http://mifos.org
> > <http://facebook.com/mifos>  <http://www.twitter.com/mifos>
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > OK, I'll fix that when I get a chance.
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
> > > dennis.hamil...@acm.org
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On the other hand, it would be great were the Apache Incubator image
> > > > linked to something better than http://trafodion.apache.org [;<).
> > > >
> > > > As a general observation, the fine print mentioning of Incubator
> would
> > > > also serve folks better if there was a link as part of the Incubator
> > > > mention.
> > > >
> > > > http://incubator.apache.org in both cases seems good enough.
> > > >
> > > > No voting required.
> > > >
> > > >  - Dennis
> > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2016 00:05
> > > > > To: general@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: Notes on branding
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Gunnar Tapper <
> tapper.gun...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > FYI, "Apache Trafodion" is part of the logo. I'm not putting the
> > > > > project
> > > > > > through another round of voting on that one. :)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Wouldn't suggest that either.
> > > > >
> > > > > What I was noting was that the text above the log and the text in
> the
> > > > > logo
> > > > > were kind of redundant.
> > > > >
> > > > > I sympathize with not wanting to make low priority changes. This
> was
> > > > > just a
> > > > > note.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Gunnar
> > > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
> > >
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Myrle Krantz]

Hi all,

The Fineract site was "dinged" for having the logo and the disclaimer
"buried deep within website".  They are both at the bottom.  But the text
"(incubating)" is at the top right next to the text "Apache Fineract".  In
fact, as a result of where it's positioned, the text "(incubating)" shows
up as part of the title in google search results.  Putting the incubating
logo at the bottom of the site was purely an aesthetic choice, made after
we checked out the website both on a laptop screen and on a mobile screen.
The decision was not made with the intention to obscure.  As to the
disclaimer, where else would you put a disclaimer, but at the bottom?

I personally feel that the Fineract website follows both the spirit and the
letter of the law when it comes to displaying its incubating status.  It
seems from this Audit result though that the IPMC disagrees with me on
this, which makes me doubt that I understand the spirit of the law.  Or
perhaps I'm just misunderstanding the audit?

In any case, the contributors to Fineract are in it for humanitarian
reasons; we don't want to subvert intentions here. If we've got something
wrong, we'd very much appreciate further guidance.

Also if Apache is going to redesign the logo (+1 non-binding from me on
that one), I hope we keep mobile screens in mind while designing.  It's a
corner case for an open source project, but nonetheless, many of our
intended beneficiaries are lucky if they have even a smart phone.

Greetings from the Voreifel, Germany
Myrle


*Myrle Krantz*
Solutions Architect
RɅĐɅЯ, The Mifos Initiative
mkra...@mifos.org | Skype: mkrantz.mifos.org | http://mifos.org
<http://facebook.com/mifos>  <http://www.twitter.com/mifos>


On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> OK, I'll fix that when I get a chance.
>
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
> dennis.hamil...@acm.org
> > wrote:
>
> > On the other hand, it would be great were the Apache Incubator image
> > linked to something better than http://trafodion.apache.org [;<).
> >
> > As a general observation, the fine print mentioning of Incubator would
> > also serve folks better if there was a link as part of the Incubator
> > mention.
> >
> > http://incubator.apache.org in both cases seems good enough.
> >
> > No voting required.
> >
> >  - Dennis
> >
> > > -----Original Message-
> > > From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com]
> > > Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2016 00:05
> > > To: general@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Notes on branding
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > FYI, "Apache Trafodion" is part of the logo. I'm not putting the
> > > project
> > > > through another round of voting on that one. :)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Wouldn't suggest that either.
> > >
> > > What I was noting was that the text above the log and the text in the
> > > logo
> > > were kind of redundant.
> > >
> > > I sympathize with not wanting to make low priority changes. This was
> > > just a
> > > note.
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
> *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Gunnar Tapper]

OK, I'll fix that when I get a chance.

On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org
> wrote:

> On the other hand, it would be great were the Apache Incubator image
> linked to something better than http://trafodion.apache.org [;<).
>
> As a general observation, the fine print mentioning of Incubator would
> also serve folks better if there was a link as part of the Incubator
> mention.
>
> http://incubator.apache.org in both cases seems good enough.
>
> No voting required.
>
>  - Dennis
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2016 00:05
> > To: general@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Notes on branding
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > FYI, "Apache Trafodion" is part of the logo. I'm not putting the
> > project
> > > through another round of voting on that one. :)
> > >
> >
> > Wouldn't suggest that either.
> >
> > What I was noting was that the text above the log and the text in the
> > logo
> > were kind of redundant.
> >
> > I sympathize with not wanting to make low priority changes. This was
> > just a
> > note.
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Thanks,

Gunnar
*If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*

RE: Notes on branding

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

On the other hand, it would be great were the Apache Incubator image linked to 
something better than http://trafodion.apache.org [;<).

As a general observation, the fine print mentioning of Incubator would also 
serve folks better if there was a link as part of the Incubator mention.

http://incubator.apache.org in both cases seems good enough.

No voting required.

 - Dennis

> -Original Message-
> From: Ted Dunning [mailto:ted.dunn...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2016 00:05
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Notes on branding
> 
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gun...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > FYI, "Apache Trafodion" is part of the logo. I'm not putting the
> project
> > through another round of voting on that one. :)
> >
> 
> Wouldn't suggest that either.
> 
> What I was noting was that the text above the log and the text in the
> logo
> were kind of redundant.
> 
> I sympathize with not wanting to make low priority changes. This was
> just a
> note.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Notes on branding

[Ted Dunning]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:55 PM, Gunnar Tapper 
wrote:

> FYI, "Apache Trafodion" is part of the logo. I'm not putting the project
> through another round of voting on that one. :)
>

Wouldn't suggest that either.

What I was noting was that the text above the log and the text in the logo
were kind of redundant.

I sympathize with not wanting to make low priority changes. This was just a
note.

Re: Notes on branding

[Gunnar Tapper]

Thanks Ted.

FYI, "Apache Trafodion" is part of the logo. I'm not putting the project
through another round of voting on that one. :)

It strikes me that the left (or right) part of a project's web site menu
could contain "Apache Incubator Project" as a standard. Such an approach
wouldn't impede website design much while making the status of the project
very clear.

Honestly, I don't want to spend a lot more time of the website itself given
that the technology is quite limited. (The project wanted a Maven-based
website so I did what I could.) It would have been another matter if I
could have use Wordpress with a good theme or something like that. :)

Gunnar

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Ted Dunning  wrote:

> Gunnar,
>
> Think that page looks pretty good (not referring to the standards, just
> looking at the page).
>
> Having the word incubator near the logo might be slightly nicer, but that
> isn't such a big deal since you have that on the project name just above
> the logo and you have the Incubator logo in the banner as well.
>
> You guys nailed the spirit part of the policy.
>
> As a design note, you have the project name in the upper left hand corner
> twice. You might be able to merge those (preserving the "Incubating", of
> course) to save some real estate and make your image case more forcefully.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Gunnar Tapper 
> wrote:
>
> > Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
> > branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html
> >
> > I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:
> >
> > - Added (incubator) to the menu bar
> > - Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
> > - Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page
> >
> > I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
> > project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
> > updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
> >
> > However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status
> in
> > the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
> > incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included
> in
> > PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
> > whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
> > guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include
> BOTH
> > the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
> >
> > I hope this helps with the discussion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gunnar
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey <
> mar...@rectangular.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > > footer"
> > > > or
> > > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > > >
> > > > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
> > CYA
> > > > legal
> > > > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> > > > communicate
> > > > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
> > > people
> > > > will know that certain caveats apply:
> > > >
> > > > Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
> > Software
> > > > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation
> is
> > > > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
> > > > indicates
> > > > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making
> > process
> > > > have
> > > > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF
> > projects.
> > > > While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
> > > > completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
> > > > project
> > > > has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
> > > >
> > > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
> > and
> > > > took
> > > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> > > communicated
> > > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
> > > would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
> > > disclaimer not buried?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gunnar
> > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
> >
>



-- 
Thanks,

Gunnar
*If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*

Re: Notes on branding

[Ted Dunning]

Gunnar,

Think that page looks pretty good (not referring to the standards, just
looking at the page).

Having the word incubator near the logo might be slightly nicer, but that
isn't such a big deal since you have that on the project name just above
the logo and you have the Incubator logo in the banner as well.

You guys nailed the spirit part of the policy.

As a design note, you have the project name in the upper left hand corner
twice. You might be able to merge those (preserving the "Incubating", of
course) to save some real estate and make your image case more forcefully.



On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Gunnar Tapper 
wrote:

> Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
> branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html
>
> I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:
>
> - Added (incubator) to the menu bar
> - Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
> - Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page
>
> I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
> project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
> updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
>
> However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status in
> the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
> incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included in
> PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
> whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
> guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include BOTH
> the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
>
> I hope this helps with the discussion.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper 
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
> > >
> > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > footer"
> > > or
> > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > >
> > > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
> CYA
> > > legal
> > > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> > > communicate
> > > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
> > people
> > > will know that certain caveats apply:
> > >
> > > Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
> Software
> > > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation is
> > > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
> > > indicates
> > > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making
> process
> > > have
> > > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF
> projects.
> > > While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
> > > completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
> > > project
> > > has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
> > >
> > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
> and
> > > took
> > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> > communicated
> > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
> > would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
> > disclaimer not buried?
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
> *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Roman Shaposhnik]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Tim Williams  wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:43 PM, John D. Ament  wrote:
>> Mike,
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:12 PM Mike Jumper  wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Gunnar Tapper 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
>>> > branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html
>>> >
>>> > I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:
>>> >
>>> > - Added (incubator) to the menu bar
>>> > - Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
>>> > - Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page
>>> >
>>> > I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
>>> > project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
>>> > updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
>>> >
>>> > However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status
>>> in
>>> > the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
>>> > incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included
>>> in
>>> > PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
>>> > whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
>>> > guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include
>>> BOTH
>>> > the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
>>> >
>>> > I hope this helps with the discussion.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> >
>>> > Gunnar
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey <
>>> mar...@rectangular.com
>>> > >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase 
>>> wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
>>> > > footer"
>>> > > > or
>>> > > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
>>> > CYA
>>> > > > legal
>>> > > > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
>>> > > > communicate
>>> > > > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
>>> > > people
>>> > > > will know that certain caveats apply:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
>>> > Software
>>> > > > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation
>>> is
>>> > > > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
>>> > > > indicates
>>> > > > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making
>>> > process
>>> > > > have
>>> > > > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF
>>> > projects.
>>> > > > While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
>>> > > > completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
>>> > > > project
>>> > > > has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
>>> > and
>>> > > > took
>>> > > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
>>> > > communicated
>>> > > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
>>> > > would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
>>> > > disclaimer not buried?
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Thanks,
>>> >
>>> > Gunnar
>>> > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>>> >
>>>
>>> John and/or Roman, can you comment specifically on how the results of the
>>> branding audit [1] should be interpreted by the podlings concerned, and
>>> (please) provide some concrete examples of what podlings should and
>>> shouldn't do with respect to the audit?
>>>
>>
>> I would say that for now, podlings should take no action unless they are
>> contacted directly to fix something about their branding.  I jumped the gun
>> a little on contacting a few podlings that seemed to be way out, but were
>> not actually against our current branding guidelines.  According to the
>> list I put together, there are eight that are not in compliance at all with
>> the established policies.  That policy being that you must include the
>> disclaimer, and it must be worded in a specific way.
>>
>> I asked a few podlings to add the incubator logo.  This was mostly because
>> most links to the podling were not using the incubator domain.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Where is the threshold between "Present, in footer, smaller font" and the
>>> much more colorful "Buried in footer"? Are not footers generally expected
>>> to be in a smaller font?
>>>
>>
>> Not saying that at all.  The thing I'm trying to weigh is how easily can I
>> discern whether this project 

Re: Notes on branding

[Gunnar Tapper]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 5:39 PM, John D. Ament  wrote:

> Some notes, but again only my opinion.
>
> <3
>
> My only nit pick with the disclaimer placement is that its even below your
> normal footer.  The more appropriate place is the about section on the home
> page.  My interpretation is that this needs to be on your website and in
> your documentation.  Not on every page.
>
> OK. I can move the text to the About section on the front page and remove
it from the footer.

>
> >
> > I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
> > project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
> > updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
> >
> > However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status
> in
> > the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
> > incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included
> in
> > PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
> > whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
> > guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include
> BOTH
> > the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
> >
>
> Inclusion in the documentation is required.  But see my note above.  We're
> not asking you to inundate the users with it (from my POV).  I would put it
> in an intro section if it were up to me.
>
> What's the preference? The disclaimer before or after the ASL text in
documentation? Do I need to have the disclaimer on wiki pages that provide
documentation, too? For example:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TRAFODION/Trafodion+Contributor+Guide

If both are required, then I'd suggest that a single ASL+disclaimer
statement with guidance is provided.

Also, I'd like to point out that graduation now means that the project has
to go hunt for every place it mentions incubation to pull out the
disclaimer.

It's seems to me that the easier approach is to redirect $
project-name.apache.org to $project-name.incubator.apache.org and do
something similar for the wiki. That way, the incubation status is quite
clear.


>

>

Re: Notes on branding

[Tim Williams]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:43 PM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> Mike,
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:12 PM Mike Jumper  wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Gunnar Tapper 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
>> > branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html
>> >
>> > I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:
>> >
>> > - Added (incubator) to the menu bar
>> > - Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
>> > - Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page
>> >
>> > I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
>> > project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
>> > updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
>> >
>> > However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status
>> in
>> > the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
>> > incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included
>> in
>> > PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
>> > whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
>> > guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include
>> BOTH
>> > the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
>> >
>> > I hope this helps with the discussion.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Gunnar
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey <
>> mar...@rectangular.com
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase 
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
>> > > footer"
>> > > > or
>> > > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
>> > > >
>> > > > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
>> > CYA
>> > > > legal
>> > > > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
>> > > > communicate
>> > > > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
>> > > people
>> > > > will know that certain caveats apply:
>> > > >
>> > > > Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
>> > Software
>> > > > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation
>> is
>> > > > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
>> > > > indicates
>> > > > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making
>> > process
>> > > > have
>> > > > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF
>> > projects.
>> > > > While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
>> > > > completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
>> > > > project
>> > > > has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
>> > > >
>> > > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
>> > and
>> > > > took
>> > > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
>> > > communicated
>> > > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
>> > > would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
>> > > disclaimer not buried?
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Gunnar
>> > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>> >
>>
>> John and/or Roman, can you comment specifically on how the results of the
>> branding audit [1] should be interpreted by the podlings concerned, and
>> (please) provide some concrete examples of what podlings should and
>> shouldn't do with respect to the audit?
>>
>
> I would say that for now, podlings should take no action unless they are
> contacted directly to fix something about their branding.  I jumped the gun
> a little on contacting a few podlings that seemed to be way out, but were
> not actually against our current branding guidelines.  According to the
> list I put together, there are eight that are not in compliance at all with
> the established policies.  That policy being that you must include the
> disclaimer, and it must be worded in a specific way.
>
> I asked a few podlings to add the incubator logo.  This was mostly because
> most links to the podling were not using the incubator domain.
>
>
>>
>> Where is the threshold between "Present, in footer, smaller font" and the
>> much more colorful "Buried in footer"? Are not footers generally expected
>> to be in a smaller font?
>>
>
> Not saying that at all.  The thing I'm trying to weigh is how easily can I
> discern whether this project is fully vetted or not.
>
> If you take Wave for example, while its at the bottom of the page, their
> entire page fits within the fold.  If you take Guacamole as another
> example, the placement makes 

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:38 PM Niall Pemberton 
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:47 PM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM Greg Chase  wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey <
> mar...@rectangular.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > > footer"
> > > > or
> > > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > > >
> > > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
> > and
> > > > took
> > > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> > > communicated
> > > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Except podlings are now being told they are "not being effective
> enough"
> > > according to an unspecified standard.
> > >
> >
> > I can't even begin to tell you how much of this I agree with.  While I
> can
> > sympathize with the IPMC members who feel this way, at the end of the day
> > its on the incubator as a whole to explain the expectations.  This is
> true
> > of both long standing members who have been here, to new members, to even
> > members who have left and come back.  It needs to be communicated.  I see
> > no mention of this on podling reports, no voices being raised.  I have
> > reported on one report thus far that we need clarification from VP TM,
> but
> > no response was received, regarding some changes to PNS's.
> >
>
> Just to come to Geode's defense here - branding was discussed when the
> community put up their website a year ago and two IPMC members (me & Roman)
> thought the current site was sufficient to satisfy incubator branding[1] -
> so we (the IPMC) also need to understand the policy better and provide
> better guidance to podlings.
>

Geode is not out of line in its branding, as defined by the branding
guidelines today.  However, from my point of view, it is hard for me to
understand that Geode may be producing not-fully-compliant releases, due to
the disclaimer's placement and formatting.

Compare with Airflow's website: http://airflow.incubator.apache.org/

They didn't have a disclaimer 48 hours ago.

John



>
> Niall
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/ro7rzmrhcsrpkk2m
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > It should be apparent to anyone who groks that intent that websites
> > where
> > > > the
> > > > disclaimers and logos are buried subvert the branding guidelines.
> > > >
> > >
> > > You are dealing with new community members. It should not be assumed
> that
> > > something is grokable, especially when it seems there isn't a
> > communicated
> > > consensus.
> > >
> >
> > Agreed 100%.  We don't make sure mentors are aware of these issues.
> > Mentors therefor cannot provide it at a lower level to podlings.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > It seems that we will have to spell things out more aggressively.
> The
> > > new
> > > > language should make it plain that podlings are expected to uphold
> the
> > > > *spirit* of the guidelines, and not treat them as some bs
> technicality
> > to
> > > > work
> > > > around.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Spirits can be hard to grasp.  As I suggested before.  If being
> > > prescriptive is too difficult, then force new podlings into a
> > standardized
> > > web template that meets requirements, and spirt.  This would actually
> > > really simplify the getting started process for new podlings.  Then
> they
> > > can either do something new with their website once they become a TLP,
> or
> > > perhaps at some mid-level of maturity.
> > >
> > >
> > This is where I begin to disagree.  We don't want podlings to just use
> > cookie cutter websites, at least I don't believe we do.  I know I just
> want
> > to see podlings use our guidelines as a bare minimum set of requirements
> > for all of their branding.  This includes websites, docs, and releases.
> > The point of the disclaimer is that there may be licensing issues within
> > the release contents and as a result may not be 100% Apache License
> > compliant.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > If podlings don't like the disclaimers, they can hurry up and do the
> > work
> > > > to
> > > > graduate.
> > >
> > >
> > > There are no objections to the disclaimer from Geode.  The only issue
> is
> > > the lack of guidelines and being held to an ungrokable standard.  We
> > > discussed the issue in our community and the response is "So what do we
> > > need to do?"
> > >
> >
>

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

Mike,


On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:12 PM Mike Jumper  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Gunnar Tapper 
> wrote:
>
> > Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
> > branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html
> >
> > I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:
> >
> > - Added (incubator) to the menu bar
> > - Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
> > - Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page
> >
> > I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
> > project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
> > updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
> >
> > However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status
> in
> > the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
> > incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included
> in
> > PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
> > whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
> > guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include
> BOTH
> > the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
> >
> > I hope this helps with the discussion.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gunnar
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey <
> mar...@rectangular.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > > footer"
> > > > or
> > > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > > >
> > > > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
> > CYA
> > > > legal
> > > > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> > > > communicate
> > > > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
> > > people
> > > > will know that certain caveats apply:
> > > >
> > > > Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
> > Software
> > > > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation
> is
> > > > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
> > > > indicates
> > > > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making
> > process
> > > > have
> > > > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF
> > projects.
> > > > While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
> > > > completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
> > > > project
> > > > has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
> > > >
> > > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
> > and
> > > > took
> > > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> > > communicated
> > > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
> > > would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
> > > disclaimer not buried?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gunnar
> > *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
> >
>
> John and/or Roman, can you comment specifically on how the results of the
> branding audit [1] should be interpreted by the podlings concerned, and
> (please) provide some concrete examples of what podlings should and
> shouldn't do with respect to the audit?
>

I would say that for now, podlings should take no action unless they are
contacted directly to fix something about their branding.  I jumped the gun
a little on contacting a few podlings that seemed to be way out, but were
not actually against our current branding guidelines.  According to the
list I put together, there are eight that are not in compliance at all with
the established policies.  That policy being that you must include the
disclaimer, and it must be worded in a specific way.

I asked a few podlings to add the incubator logo.  This was mostly because
most links to the podling were not using the incubator domain.


>
> Where is the threshold between "Present, in footer, smaller font" and the
> much more colorful "Buried in footer"? Are not footers generally expected
> to be in a smaller font?
>

Not saying that at all.  The thing I'm trying to weigh is how easily can I
discern whether this project is fully vetted or not.

If you take Wave for example, while its at the bottom of the page, their
entire page fits within the fold.  If you take Guacamole as another
example, the placement makes it read as if it were website legal mumbo when
that's not the intent.  The disclaimer isn't a disclaimer about the podling
website.


>
> Given that it sounds like the footer is generally-accepted sensible place
> for the 

Re: Notes on branding

[Niall Pemberton]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:47 PM, John D. Ament  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM Greg Chase  wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
> > >
> > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > footer"
> > > or
> > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > >
> > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
> and
> > > took
> > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> > communicated
> > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> > >
> >
> > Except podlings are now being told they are "not being effective enough"
> > according to an unspecified standard.
> >
>
> I can't even begin to tell you how much of this I agree with.  While I can
> sympathize with the IPMC members who feel this way, at the end of the day
> its on the incubator as a whole to explain the expectations.  This is true
> of both long standing members who have been here, to new members, to even
> members who have left and come back.  It needs to be communicated.  I see
> no mention of this on podling reports, no voices being raised.  I have
> reported on one report thus far that we need clarification from VP TM, but
> no response was received, regarding some changes to PNS's.
>

Just to come to Geode's defense here - branding was discussed when the
community put up their website a year ago and two IPMC members (me & Roman)
thought the current site was sufficient to satisfy incubator branding[1] -
so we (the IPMC) also need to understand the policy better and provide
better guidance to podlings.

Niall

[1] http://markmail.org/message/ro7rzmrhcsrpkk2m

>
> >
> > >
> > > It should be apparent to anyone who groks that intent that websites
> where
> > > the
> > > disclaimers and logos are buried subvert the branding guidelines.
> > >
> >
> > You are dealing with new community members. It should not be assumed that
> > something is grokable, especially when it seems there isn't a
> communicated
> > consensus.
> >
>
> Agreed 100%.  We don't make sure mentors are aware of these issues.
> Mentors therefor cannot provide it at a lower level to podlings.
>
>
> >
> >
> > > It seems that we will have to spell things out more aggressively.  The
> > new
> > > language should make it plain that podlings are expected to uphold the
> > > *spirit* of the guidelines, and not treat them as some bs technicality
> to
> > > work
> > > around.
> > >
> >
> > Spirits can be hard to grasp.  As I suggested before.  If being
> > prescriptive is too difficult, then force new podlings into a
> standardized
> > web template that meets requirements, and spirt.  This would actually
> > really simplify the getting started process for new podlings.  Then they
> > can either do something new with their website once they become a TLP, or
> > perhaps at some mid-level of maturity.
> >
> >
> This is where I begin to disagree.  We don't want podlings to just use
> cookie cutter websites, at least I don't believe we do.  I know I just want
> to see podlings use our guidelines as a bare minimum set of requirements
> for all of their branding.  This includes websites, docs, and releases.
> The point of the disclaimer is that there may be licensing issues within
> the release contents and as a result may not be 100% Apache License
> compliant.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > If podlings don't like the disclaimers, they can hurry up and do the
> work
> > > to
> > > graduate.
> >
> >
> > There are no objections to the disclaimer from Geode.  The only issue is
> > the lack of guidelines and being held to an ungrokable standard.  We
> > discussed the issue in our community and the response is "So what do we
> > need to do?"
> >
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Mike Jumper]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Gunnar Tapper 
wrote:

> Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
> branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html
>
> I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:
>
> - Added (incubator) to the menu bar
> - Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
> - Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page
>
> I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
> project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
> updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
>
> However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status in
> the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
> incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included in
> PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
> whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
> guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include BOTH
> the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
>
> I hope this helps with the discussion.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper 
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
> > >
> > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > footer"
> > > or
> > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > >
> > > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
> CYA
> > > legal
> > > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> > > communicate
> > > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
> > people
> > > will know that certain caveats apply:
> > >
> > > Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
> Software
> > > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation is
> > > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
> > > indicates
> > > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making
> process
> > > have
> > > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF
> projects.
> > > While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
> > > completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
> > > project
> > > has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
> > >
> > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
> and
> > > took
> > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> > communicated
> > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
> > would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
> > disclaimer not buried?
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
> *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>

John and/or Roman, can you comment specifically on how the results of the
branding audit [1] should be interpreted by the podlings concerned, and
(please) provide some concrete examples of what podlings should and
shouldn't do with respect to the audit?

Where is the threshold between "Present, in footer, smaller font" and the
much more colorful "Buried in footer"? Are not footers generally expected
to be in a smaller font?

Given that it sounds like the footer is generally-accepted sensible place
for the disclaimer [2], and that the branding guidelines do not currently
strictly require the Incubator logo [3], I'm not sure what the audit is
trying to say at this point.

If the consensus is that the guidelines need to change, why is an audit
occurring before the actual establishment of said guidelines? If the
guidelines are not changing, why is an audit occurring which applies
undocumented criteria?

Thanks,

- Mike

[1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BrandingAuditJune2016
[2]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/acf796a286ed8202185b2a3b3509389630f5c833982e7b857ce3ab12@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html#logos

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

Some notes, but again only my opinion.

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 6:44 PM Gunnar Tapper 
wrote:

> Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
> branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html
>
> I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:
>
> - Added (incubator) to the menu bar
>

IMHO, this isn't necessary.  The branding guide clearly uses "Apache
Podling-Name"


> - Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
>

<3
Just to be clear, I believe the inclusion of logo is a typical ask for the
parent/sub project structure, though I can't find anything definitive on
the matter.


> - Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page
>

<3

My only nit pick with the disclaimer placement is that its even below your
normal footer.  The more appropriate place is the about section on the home
page.  My interpretation is that this needs to be on your website and in
your documentation.  Not on every page.


>
> I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
> project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
> updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
>
> However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status in
> the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
> incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included in
> PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
> whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
> guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include BOTH
> the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
>

Inclusion in the documentation is required.  But see my note above.  We're
not asking you to inundate the users with it (from my POV).  I would put it
in an intro section if it were up to me.


>
> I hope this helps with the discussion.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper 
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
> > >
> > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > footer"
> > > or
> > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > >
> > > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
> CYA
> > > legal
> > > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> > > communicate
> > > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
> > people
> > > will know that certain caveats apply:
> > >
> > > Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
> Software
> > > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation is
> > > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
> > > indicates
> > > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making
> process
> > > have
> > > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF
> projects.
> > > While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
> > > completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
> > > project
> > > has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
> > >
> > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
> and
> > > took
> > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> > communicated
> > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
> > would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
> > disclaimer not buried?
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
> *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Gunnar Tapper]

Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:

- Added (incubator) to the menu bar
- Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
- Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page

I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.

However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status in
the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included in
PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include BOTH
the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.

I hope this helps with the discussion.

Thanks,

Gunnar

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper 
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey 
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
> >
> > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> footer"
> > or
> > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> >
> > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not CYA
> > legal
> > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> > communicate
> > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
> people
> > will know that certain caveats apply:
> >
> > Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache Software
> > Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation is
> > required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
> > indicates
> > that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process
> > have
> > stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects.
> > While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
> > completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
> > project
> > has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
> >
> > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as and
> > took
> > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> communicated
> > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> >
> >
> Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
> would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
> disclaimer not buried?
>



-- 
Thanks,

Gunnar
*If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*

Re: Notes on branding

[Gregory Chase]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 2:16 PM, John D. Ament  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:52 PM Greg Chase  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > This email encrypted by tiny buttons & fat thumbs, beta voice
> recognition,
> > and autocorrect on my iPhone.
> >
> > > On Jul 1, 2016, at 1:41 PM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:35 PM Tim Williams 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey <
> mar...@rectangular.com
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase 
> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > >> footer" or
> >  "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > >>>
> > >>> Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
> > CYA
> > >> legal
> > >>> boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> > >> communicate
> > >>> (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating.
> > >>
> > >> I haven't heard anyone suggesting "CYA" or "buried in fine print"?
> > >> Most sites put notices at the bottom of a page similar to how we put
> > >> our equally important copyright/trademark notices at the bottom of our
> > >> home page.  That, along with having the page saying "(Incubating)" all
> > >> over the place is surely enough of a notice... this "must be above the
> > >> fold" stuff is overreaching and encroaching on the PPMC.  They have
> > >> the disclaimer, let's not overcome our boredom by being helicopter
> > >> parents...
> > >
> > > Please don't interpret the current research being done as saying that
> the
> > > logo/disclaimer has to be above the fold.  There are certain ways I've
> > seen
> > > the disclaimer where its not clear how its used, or what it's related
> to.
> > > I've seen podlings use differing fonts to make it seem unimportant, and
> > > actually think it makes more sense in the footer.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > >
> > The observations are listed as "issues" and this is described as a
> > "branding audit", not a "survey."
> >
> > The meaning is clear. It's fine if you choose to redefine as a result of
> > feedback.
> >
>
> Good point.  In my mind I was treating them as findings/observations.
> Reworded the title.
>
> John
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >>
> > >> --tim
> > >>
> > >> -
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>


Now that is good fodder for a discussion.

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:52 PM Greg Chase  wrote:

>
>
> This email encrypted by tiny buttons & fat thumbs, beta voice recognition,
> and autocorrect on my iPhone.
>
> > On Jul 1, 2016, at 1:41 PM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:35 PM Tim Williams 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey  >
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
> >>>
>  The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> >> footer" or
>  "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> >>>
> >>> Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
> CYA
> >> legal
> >>> boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> >> communicate
> >>> (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating.
> >>
> >> I haven't heard anyone suggesting "CYA" or "buried in fine print"?
> >> Most sites put notices at the bottom of a page similar to how we put
> >> our equally important copyright/trademark notices at the bottom of our
> >> home page.  That, along with having the page saying "(Incubating)" all
> >> over the place is surely enough of a notice... this "must be above the
> >> fold" stuff is overreaching and encroaching on the PPMC.  They have
> >> the disclaimer, let's not overcome our boredom by being helicopter
> >> parents...
> >
> > Please don't interpret the current research being done as saying that the
> > logo/disclaimer has to be above the fold.  There are certain ways I've
> seen
> > the disclaimer where its not clear how its used, or what it's related to.
> > I've seen podlings use differing fonts to make it seem unimportant, and
> > actually think it makes more sense in the footer.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> The observations are listed as "issues" and this is described as a
> "branding audit", not a "survey."
>
> The meaning is clear. It's fine if you choose to redefine as a result of
> feedback.
>

Good point.  In my mind I was treating them as findings/observations.
Reworded the title.

John


>
>
>
>
> >>
> >> --tim
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Greg Chase]

This email encrypted by tiny buttons & fat thumbs, beta voice recognition, and 
autocorrect on my iPhone.

> On Jul 1, 2016, at 1:41 PM, John D. Ament  wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:35 PM Tim Williams  wrote:
>> 
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey 
>> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
>>> 
 The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
>> footer" or
 "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
>>> 
>>> Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not CYA
>> legal
>>> boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
>> communicate
>>> (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating.
>> 
>> I haven't heard anyone suggesting "CYA" or "buried in fine print"?
>> Most sites put notices at the bottom of a page similar to how we put
>> our equally important copyright/trademark notices at the bottom of our
>> home page.  That, along with having the page saying "(Incubating)" all
>> over the place is surely enough of a notice... this "must be above the
>> fold" stuff is overreaching and encroaching on the PPMC.  They have
>> the disclaimer, let's not overcome our boredom by being helicopter
>> parents...
> 
> Please don't interpret the current research being done as saying that the
> logo/disclaimer has to be above the fold.  There are certain ways I've seen
> the disclaimer where its not clear how its used, or what it's related to.
> I've seen podlings use differing fonts to make it seem unimportant, and
> actually think it makes more sense in the footer.
> 
> John
> 
> 
The observations are listed as "issues" and this is described as a "branding 
audit", not a "survey."

The meaning is clear. It's fine if you choose to redefine as a result of 
feedback.




>> 
>> --tim
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>> 
>> 

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:35 PM Tim Williams  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey 
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
> >
> >> The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> footer" or
> >> "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> >
> > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not CYA
> legal
> > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> communicate
> > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating.
>
> I haven't heard anyone suggesting "CYA" or "buried in fine print"?
> Most sites put notices at the bottom of a page similar to how we put
> our equally important copyright/trademark notices at the bottom of our
> home page.  That, along with having the page saying "(Incubating)" all
> over the place is surely enough of a notice... this "must be above the
> fold" stuff is overreaching and encroaching on the PPMC.  They have
> the disclaimer, let's not overcome our boredom by being helicopter
> parents...
>

Please don't interpret the current research being done as saying that the
logo/disclaimer has to be above the fold.  There are certain ways I've seen
the disclaimer where its not clear how its used, or what it's related to.
I've seen podlings use differing fonts to make it seem unimportant, and
actually think it makes more sense in the footer.

John


>
> --tim
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Tim Williams]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey  wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
>
>> The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in footer" or
>> "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
>
> Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not CYA legal
> boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to communicate
> (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating.

I haven't heard anyone suggesting "CYA" or "buried in fine print"?
Most sites put notices at the bottom of a page similar to how we put
our equally important copyright/trademark notices at the bottom of our
home page.  That, along with having the page saying "(Incubating)" all
over the place is surely enough of a notice... this "must be above the
fold" stuff is overreaching and encroaching on the PPMC.  They have
the disclaimer, let's not overcome our boredom by being helicopter
parents...

--tim

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Notes on branding

[Mike Jumper]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:47 PM, John D. Ament 
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM Greg Chase  wrote:
>
> ...
> >
> > Spirits can be hard to grasp.  As I suggested before.  If being
> > prescriptive is too difficult, then force new podlings into a
> standardized
> > web template that meets requirements, and spirt.  This would actually
> > really simplify the getting started process for new podlings.  Then they
> > can either do something new with their website once they become a TLP, or
> > perhaps at some mid-level of maturity.
> >
> >
> This is where I begin to disagree.  We don't want podlings to just use
> cookie cutter websites, at least I don't believe we do.  I know I just want
> to see podlings use our guidelines as a bare minimum set of requirements
> for all of their branding.  This includes websites, docs, and releases.
> The point of the disclaimer is that there may be licensing issues within
> the release contents and as a result may not be 100% Apache License
> compliant.
>
>
There must be some middle ground between the extremes.

Cookie-cutter websites would be horrible, but there must be something
non-spiritual that podlings can reliably adhere to. If the documentation
states that podlings must do X, but they are actively frowned upon unless
they do X+1, we're heading into "pieces of flair" territory [1].

[1] https://vimeo.com/102830089

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:19 PM Greg Chase  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey 
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
> >
> > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> footer"
> > or
> > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> >
> > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as and
> > took
> > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> communicated
> > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> >
>
> Except podlings are now being told they are "not being effective enough"
> according to an unspecified standard.
>

I can't even begin to tell you how much of this I agree with.  While I can
sympathize with the IPMC members who feel this way, at the end of the day
its on the incubator as a whole to explain the expectations.  This is true
of both long standing members who have been here, to new members, to even
members who have left and come back.  It needs to be communicated.  I see
no mention of this on podling reports, no voices being raised.  I have
reported on one report thus far that we need clarification from VP TM, but
no response was received, regarding some changes to PNS's.


>
>
> >
> > It should be apparent to anyone who groks that intent that websites where
> > the
> > disclaimers and logos are buried subvert the branding guidelines.
> >
>
> You are dealing with new community members. It should not be assumed that
> something is grokable, especially when it seems there isn't a communicated
> consensus.
>

Agreed 100%.  We don't make sure mentors are aware of these issues.
Mentors therefor cannot provide it at a lower level to podlings.


>
>
> > It seems that we will have to spell things out more aggressively.  The
> new
> > language should make it plain that podlings are expected to uphold the
> > *spirit* of the guidelines, and not treat them as some bs technicality to
> > work
> > around.
> >
>
> Spirits can be hard to grasp.  As I suggested before.  If being
> prescriptive is too difficult, then force new podlings into a standardized
> web template that meets requirements, and spirt.  This would actually
> really simplify the getting started process for new podlings.  Then they
> can either do something new with their website once they become a TLP, or
> perhaps at some mid-level of maturity.
>
>
This is where I begin to disagree.  We don't want podlings to just use
cookie cutter websites, at least I don't believe we do.  I know I just want
to see podlings use our guidelines as a bare minimum set of requirements
for all of their branding.  This includes websites, docs, and releases.
The point of the disclaimer is that there may be licensing issues within
the release contents and as a result may not be 100% Apache License
compliant.


>
> >
> > If podlings don't like the disclaimers, they can hurry up and do the work
> > to
> > graduate.
>
>
> There are no objections to the disclaimer from Geode.  The only issue is
> the lack of guidelines and being held to an ungrokable standard.  We
> discussed the issue in our community and the response is "So what do we
> need to do?"
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Mike Jumper]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey 
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
>
> > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in footer"
> or
> > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
>
> Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not CYA
> legal
> boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> communicate
> (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way, people
> will know that certain caveats apply:
>
> Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache Software
> Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation is
> required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
> indicates
> that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process
> have
> stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects.
> While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
> completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
> project
> has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
>
> What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as and
> took
> it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was communicated
> effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
>
>
Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
disclaimer not buried?

Re: Notes on branding

[Greg Chase]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey 
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:
>
> > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in footer"
> or
> > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
>
> What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as and
> took
> it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was communicated
> effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
>

Except podlings are now being told they are "not being effective enough"
according to an unspecified standard.


>
> It should be apparent to anyone who groks that intent that websites where
> the
> disclaimers and logos are buried subvert the branding guidelines.
>

You are dealing with new community members. It should not be assumed that
something is grokable, especially when it seems there isn't a communicated
consensus.


> It seems that we will have to spell things out more aggressively.  The new
> language should make it plain that podlings are expected to uphold the
> *spirit* of the guidelines, and not treat them as some bs technicality to
> work
> around.
>

Spirits can be hard to grasp.  As I suggested before.  If being
prescriptive is too difficult, then force new podlings into a standardized
web template that meets requirements, and spirt.  This would actually
really simplify the getting started process for new podlings.  Then they
can either do something new with their website once they become a TLP, or
perhaps at some mid-level of maturity.


>
> If podlings don't like the disclaimers, they can hurry up and do the work
> to
> graduate.


There are no objections to the disclaimer from Geode.  The only issue is
the lack of guidelines and being held to an ungrokable standard.  We
discussed the issue in our community and the response is "So what do we
need to do?"

Re: Notes on branding

[Marvin Humphrey]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase  wrote:

> The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in footer" or
> "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".

Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not CYA legal
boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to communicate
(effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way, people
will know that certain caveats apply:

Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache Software
Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation is
required of all newly accepted projects until a further review indicates
that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making process have
stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF projects.
While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the project
has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.

What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as and took
it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was communicated
effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.

It should be apparent to anyone who groks that intent that websites where the
disclaimers and logos are buried subvert the branding guidelines.

It seems that we will have to spell things out more aggressively.  The new
language should make it plain that podlings are expected to uphold the
*spirit* of the guidelines, and not treat them as some bs technicality to work
around.

If podlings don't like the disclaimers, they can hurry up and do the work to
graduate.

Marvin Humphrey

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:35 PM Greg Chase  wrote:

> Thanks for doing the audit.
>
> The Geode PPMC has noted the finding in the wiki with our site.
>
> However, we'd like to see a good example of a compliant website.
>
> The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in footer" or
> "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
>

Yes, this is part of the pending work.  It seems as though there's a divide
on how prominent incubator branding needs to be.


>
> Considering the Geode web design was forked from another TLP, is it
> possible that some of the feedback is a bit arbitrary?
>

Nope.  If it came from a TLP, the TLP wouldn't need to comply with
incubator branding rules.  Specifically, TLPs are assumed to be vetted
releases that don't carry the disclaimer.


>
> Otherwise maybe all incubating projects should have the same website
> template, and then be free to evolve their design once they graduate to
> TLP.
>
> -Greg
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Shane Curcuru 
> wrote:
>
> > John D. Ament wrote on 6/29/16 7:36 AM:
> > > Hey guys
> > >
> > > I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues.
> > > Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were not
> > > within branding requirements.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings,
> but I
> > > went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas, Beam
> and
> > > Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting projects.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for the good work!  Please do report back - here or to
> > trademarks@ - about your progress and how PPMCs respond.
> >
> > In particular, any feedback on our published policies/guidelines is very
> > important.  As we scale, we need to ensure that most podlings can figure
> > out the right thing to do from the docs, and not as much from direct
> > pushes by our volunteer mentors and IPMC folks.
> >
> > Separately, a long-term project of mine is to ensure the branding bits
> > on the incubator site are clear and point to the right parts of the
> > formal trademark policies here:
> >
> >   http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/resources
> >
> > - Shane
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Julian Hyde]

On 2016-07-01 07:37 (-0700), Shane Curcuru  wrote: 
> 
> In particular, any feedback on our published policies/guidelines is very
> important.  As we scale, we need to ensure that most podlings can figure
> out the right thing to do from the docs, and not as much from direct
> pushes by our volunteer mentors and IPMC folks.

+1

As a mentor, I am trying very hard not to say to my podlings “you need to fix 
x, y and z”. Because if I do, the inevitale response, five minutes later, is 
“Done.” We’re trying to teach podlings to manage their own brand, which 
involves thinking.

The audit is useful (it keeps us mentors on our toes!) but a well-documented 
policy is more important.

Julian


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Notes on branding

[Greg Chase]

Thanks for doing the audit.

The Geode PPMC has noted the finding in the wiki with our site.

However, we'd like to see a good example of a compliant website.

The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in footer" or
"disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".

Considering the Geode web design was forked from another TLP, is it
possible that some of the feedback is a bit arbitrary?

Otherwise maybe all incubating projects should have the same website
template, and then be free to evolve their design once they graduate to TLP.

-Greg

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 7:37 AM, Shane Curcuru  wrote:

> John D. Ament wrote on 6/29/16 7:36 AM:
> > Hey guys
> >
> > I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues.
> > Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were not
> > within branding requirements.
> >
> > I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings, but I
> > went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas, Beam and
> > Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting projects.
> >
> > John
> >
>
> Thanks for the good work!  Please do report back - here or to
> trademarks@ - about your progress and how PPMCs respond.
>
> In particular, any feedback on our published policies/guidelines is very
> important.  As we scale, we need to ensure that most podlings can figure
> out the right thing to do from the docs, and not as much from direct
> pushes by our volunteer mentors and IPMC folks.
>
> Separately, a long-term project of mine is to ensure the branding bits
> on the incubator site are clear and point to the right parts of the
> formal trademark policies here:
>
>   http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/resources
>
> - Shane
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Shane Curcuru]

John D. Ament wrote on 6/29/16 7:36 AM:
> Hey guys
> 
> I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues.
> Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were not
> within branding requirements.
> 
> I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings, but I
> went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas, Beam and
> Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting projects.
> 
> John
> 

Thanks for the good work!  Please do report back - here or to
trademarks@ - about your progress and how PPMCs respond.

In particular, any feedback on our published policies/guidelines is very
important.  As we scale, we need to ensure that most podlings can figure
out the right thing to do from the docs, and not as much from direct
pushes by our volunteer mentors and IPMC folks.

Separately, a long-term project of mine is to ensure the branding bits
on the incubator site are clear and point to the right parts of the
formal trademark policies here:

  http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/resources

- Shane

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: Notes on branding

[Pierre Smits]

John,

It seems to me you just defined a (potential) solution direction.

Best regards,

Pierre

On Friday, July 1, 2016, John D. Ament  wrote:

> Its definitely an option, once we have a clear sign in place.  Just don't
> forget, clutch isn't magic.  Unless we build some smarts that can visit the
> podling page, look at the webpage and see if the incubator logo are
> present, its going to be based on a flag in podlings.xml.  I can actually
> think of a way to do it with Selenium + Sikuli instead of myself going to
> each webpage.
>
> John
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:00 AM Pierre Smits  > wrote:
>
> > Hi John, All,
> >
> > My suggestion is to improve the incubator clutch, so that the overview
> > http://incubator.apache.org/clutch.html reflects whether podlings are:
> >
> >
> >1. Compliant with ASF Branding regulations
> >2. Compliant with ASF Incubator Branding regulations.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > ORRTIZ.COM 
> > OFBiz based solutions & services
> >
> > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 5:49 AM, John D. Ament  >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > As a follow up to this.  I've started tracking a wiki page with the
> > results
> > > of the audit.  You can find it here:
> > > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BrandingAuditJune2016
> > >
> > > There's two things I want to get out of this.
> > >
> > > - Agreement on our branding.  It seems like there's some notion that
> our
> > > branding rules right now are too lenient.  Do we want to require the
> > > incubator logo? Do we want both artifacts above the fold?
> > >
> > > - Communication to the podlings.  Once all issues are identified, get
> the
> > > list of issues to all offending podlings (which I'm assuming is 90% of
> > them
> > > right now, based on the first 18).  Make sure they fix them prior to
> > (next
> > > release? board report?)
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 7:36 AM Pierre Smits  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi John,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for keeping up the good work and being adamant/unwavering
> > > regarding
> > > > the branding aspects visavis the podlings.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > >
> > > > Pierre Smits
> > > >
> > > > ORRTIZ.COM 
> > > > OFBiz based solutions & services
> > > >
> > > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> > > > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 1:36 PM, John D. Ament <
> johndam...@apache.org >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hey guys
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding
> issues.
> > > > > Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were
> > not
> > > > > within branding requirements.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings,
> > > but I
> > > > > went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas,
> Beam
> > > and
> > > > > Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting
> projects.
> > > > >
> > > > > John
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

Its definitely an option, once we have a clear sign in place.  Just don't
forget, clutch isn't magic.  Unless we build some smarts that can visit the
podling page, look at the webpage and see if the incubator logo are
present, its going to be based on a flag in podlings.xml.  I can actually
think of a way to do it with Selenium + Sikuli instead of myself going to
each webpage.

John

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 4:00 AM Pierre Smits  wrote:

> Hi John, All,
>
> My suggestion is to improve the incubator clutch, so that the overview
> http://incubator.apache.org/clutch.html reflects whether podlings are:
>
>
>1. Compliant with ASF Branding regulations
>2. Compliant with ASF Incubator Branding regulations.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> ORRTIZ.COM 
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 5:49 AM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > As a follow up to this.  I've started tracking a wiki page with the
> results
> > of the audit.  You can find it here:
> > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BrandingAuditJune2016
> >
> > There's two things I want to get out of this.
> >
> > - Agreement on our branding.  It seems like there's some notion that our
> > branding rules right now are too lenient.  Do we want to require the
> > incubator logo? Do we want both artifacts above the fold?
> >
> > - Communication to the podlings.  Once all issues are identified, get the
> > list of issues to all offending podlings (which I'm assuming is 90% of
> them
> > right now, based on the first 18).  Make sure they fix them prior to
> (next
> > release? board report?)
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 7:36 AM Pierre Smits 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi John,
> > >
> > > Thanks for keeping up the good work and being adamant/unwavering
> > regarding
> > > the branding aspects visavis the podlings.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Pierre Smits
> > >
> > > ORRTIZ.COM 
> > > OFBiz based solutions & services
> > >
> > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> > > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 1:36 PM, John D. Ament 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey guys
> > > >
> > > > I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues.
> > > > Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were
> not
> > > > within branding requirements.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings,
> > but I
> > > > went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas, Beam
> > and
> > > > Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting projects.
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Pierre Smits]

Hi John, All,

My suggestion is to improve the incubator clutch, so that the overview
http://incubator.apache.org/clutch.html reflects whether podlings are:


   1. Compliant with ASF Branding regulations
   2. Compliant with ASF Incubator Branding regulations.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 5:49 AM, John D. Ament  wrote:

> All,
>
> As a follow up to this.  I've started tracking a wiki page with the results
> of the audit.  You can find it here:
> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BrandingAuditJune2016
>
> There's two things I want to get out of this.
>
> - Agreement on our branding.  It seems like there's some notion that our
> branding rules right now are too lenient.  Do we want to require the
> incubator logo? Do we want both artifacts above the fold?
>
> - Communication to the podlings.  Once all issues are identified, get the
> list of issues to all offending podlings (which I'm assuming is 90% of them
> right now, based on the first 18).  Make sure they fix them prior to (next
> release? board report?)
>
> John
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 7:36 AM Pierre Smits 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
> >
> > Thanks for keeping up the good work and being adamant/unwavering
> regarding
> > the branding aspects visavis the podlings.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Pierre Smits
> >
> > ORRTIZ.COM 
> > OFBiz based solutions & services
> >
> > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 1:36 PM, John D. Ament 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hey guys
> > >
> > > I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues.
> > > Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were not
> > > within branding requirements.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings,
> but I
> > > went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas, Beam
> and
> > > Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting projects.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> >
>

Re: Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

All,

As a follow up to this.  I've started tracking a wiki page with the results
of the audit.  You can find it here:
https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BrandingAuditJune2016

There's two things I want to get out of this.

- Agreement on our branding.  It seems like there's some notion that our
branding rules right now are too lenient.  Do we want to require the
incubator logo? Do we want both artifacts above the fold?

- Communication to the podlings.  Once all issues are identified, get the
list of issues to all offending podlings (which I'm assuming is 90% of them
right now, based on the first 18).  Make sure they fix them prior to (next
release? board report?)

John

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 7:36 AM Pierre Smits  wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> Thanks for keeping up the good work and being adamant/unwavering regarding
> the branding aspects visavis the podlings.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> ORRTIZ.COM 
> OFBiz based solutions & services
>
> OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
> http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 1:36 PM, John D. Ament 
> wrote:
>
> > Hey guys
> >
> > I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues.
> > Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were not
> > within branding requirements.
> >
> > I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings, but I
> > went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas, Beam and
> > Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting projects.
> >
> > John
> >
>

Re: Notes on branding

[Pierre Smits]

Hi John,

Thanks for keeping up the good work and being adamant/unwavering regarding
the branding aspects visavis the podlings.

Best regards,

Pierre Smits

ORRTIZ.COM 
OFBiz based solutions & services

OFBiz Extensions Marketplace
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 1:36 PM, John D. Ament 
wrote:

> Hey guys
>
> I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues.
> Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were not
> within branding requirements.
>
> I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings, but I
> went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas, Beam and
> Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting projects.
>
> John
>

Notes on branding

[John D. Ament]

Hey guys

I'm starting to go through the podlings to identify branding issues.
Touched the first 12 projects, for those that had websites, 4 were not
within branding requirements.

I'm not sure if other scan give a hand here on contacting podlings, but I
went through Airflow -> Fineract, and contacted Airflow, Atlas, Beam and
Blur.  Otherwise I'll continue to churn through contacting projects.

John