FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-30-2008, 06:56 AM
Axel Thimm
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

Hi,

I'm about to create some Fedora Remixes and I'm not quite sure whether
it is one or not (in the trademark sense). I know it's been discussed
a lot, but I see some contradictions:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Remix says

The "Fedora Remix" mark identifies a derivation of software that is
not produced or maintained by the Fedora Project. It may contain some
software that is produced or maintained by the Fedora
Project. [...] It can also be combined with other, non-Fedora
software to produce interesting and compelling products. A Fedora
Remix product may contain some software that is forbidden to
include in Fedora itself.

So I understand it that anything that includes one Fedora package is a
remix already? So the first question is

a) when is something *not* a remix?

Next I read on various other wiki pages, that a remix is a subset of
only official Fedora packages, e.g.:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JeroenVanMeeuwen/Revisor/FedoraRebrandRemixGuidelines

Remix:: A Remix of Fedora is taking whatever amount of packages
from the Fedora repositories and composing media based on that
package set. Respin:: A Respin specifically updates existing
media. Note the 'updating' is the key here. Usually, a Remix will
include updates if they're available but that isn't the key point
of a Remix, but for Respins, it is. Rebrand:: A Rebrand of Fedora

b) So what is correct "Remix: includes offcial Fedora packages and
more" or "Remix: includes only packages from a subset of offcial
Fedora packages"?

What I'd like to do is (not always combined)

o apply updates-released
o add closed source graphics card drivers
o add multimedia stuff

Is this still a fedora remix?

Thanks and have a good start into 2009!
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 12-30-2008, 09:52 AM
Karsten Wade
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 09:56:20AM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:

> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Remix says
>
> The "Fedora Remix" mark identifies a derivation of software that is
> not produced or maintained by the Fedora Project. It may contain some
> software that is produced or maintained by the Fedora
> Project. [...] It can also be combined with other, non-Fedora
> software to produce interesting and compelling products. A Fedora
> Remix product may contain some software that is forbidden to
> include in Fedora itself.
>
> So I understand it that anything that includes one Fedora package is a
> remix already?

Meaning, what if another RPM-based distribution uses Fedora RPMs?

> So the first question is
>
> a) when is something *not* a remix?

Perhaps it could be explained better, but the section you [...]'ed
around is relevant:

'Fedora is a completely free and redistributable computing platform
that can be "remixed" into different combinations of software.'

That defines Fedora as a distro, which would seem to exclude the idea
of calling another distro that has Fedora packages in it a Fedora
Remix.

> Next I read on various other wiki pages, that a remix is a subset of
> only official Fedora packages, e.g.:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JeroenVanMeeuwen/Revisor/FedoraRebrandRemixGuidelines
>
> Remix:: A Remix of Fedora is taking whatever amount of packages
> from the Fedora repositories and composing media based on that
> package set. Respin:: A Respin specifically updates existing
> media. Note the 'updating' is the key here. Usually, a Remix will
> include updates if they're available but that isn't the key point
> of a Remix, but for Respins, it is. Rebrand:: A Rebrand of Fedora
>
> b) So what is correct "Remix: includes offcial Fedora packages and
> more" or "Remix: includes only packages from a subset of offcial
> Fedora packages"?

This second explanation under kanarip's content sandbox doesn't say
"only". It could be clearer, though. It is clearly a draft in his
personal space, though.

> What I'd like to do is (not always combined)
>
> o apply updates-released
> o add closed source graphics card drivers
> o add multimedia stuff
>
> Is this still a fedora remix?

Those all sound to me like a Fedora Remix.

- Karsten
--
Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener
http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
AD0E0C41
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 12-30-2008, 04:10 PM
Chris Tyler
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 09:56 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm about to create some Fedora Remixes and I'm not quite sure whether
> it is one or not (in the trademark sense). I know it's been discussed
> a lot, but I see some contradictions:


Hi Axel,

As the board worked through the trademark guidelines, we scoped down two
terms: "spin" and "remix". Here's the difference:

- A Spin consists only of packages from the Fedora repositories. It is
trademark-approved by the board and has gone through the Spins process
(which is being refined by fesco). People using a spin can have the same
confidence in license freedom as Fedora distribution users -- in fact,
the main Fedora distribution images are effectively a spin too. The
official Fedora logo may be used in conjunction with spins.

- A Remix consists of packages from the Fedora repositories but may also
contain other packages. It does not require trademark approval and does
not have to go through the spins process. Anyone can produce a remix at
any time without any formal process. The Fedora Remix "secondary mark"
may be used on Remixes, providing some really simple guidelines are
followed.

I hope this helps clarify the situation. As soon as the trademark
guidelines and Spins process are finalized (and we're pretty much
there), we'll start pumping the message about these terms.

Paul and Spot have been driving this process -- here are the relevant
pages:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/New_trademark_guidelines
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/Secondary_trademark_usage_guidelines

-Chris

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 12-30-2008, 09:05 PM
"Mani A"
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Axel Thimm wrote:
> b) So what is correct "Remix: includes offcial Fedora packages and
> more" or "Remix: includes only packages from a subset of offcial
> Fedora packages"?

I think only the first should qualify to be a 'remix'.
The second category should be called something else.
Maybe 'custom release' or rather something like

'Fedora 10 CTE' (Custom TeX Edition)


Best

A. Mani


- --
A. Mani
Member, Cal. Math. Soc


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFJWp0VoIK4BlImohYRAl8TAJsEux4wJrjKDnRsJ5gUMZ 9aVnnZLgCdFvs5
b+Hqbjz69f7wL5CXAdrzvsU=
=d9WM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 12-30-2008, 11:36 PM
"Paul W. Frields"
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:10:35PM -0500, Chris Tyler wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 09:56 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm about to create some Fedora Remixes and I'm not quite sure whether
> > it is one or not (in the trademark sense). I know it's been discussed
> > a lot, but I see some contradictions:
>
>
> Hi Axel,
>
> As the board worked through the trademark guidelines, we scoped down two
> terms: "spin" and "remix". Here's the difference:
>
> - A Spin consists only of packages from the Fedora repositories. It is
> trademark-approved by the board and has gone through the Spins process
> (which is being refined by fesco). People using a spin can have the same
> confidence in license freedom as Fedora distribution users -- in fact,
> the main Fedora distribution images are effectively a spin too. The
> official Fedora logo may be used in conjunction with spins.
>
> - A Remix consists of packages from the Fedora repositories but may also
> contain other packages. It does not require trademark approval and does
> not have to go through the spins process. Anyone can produce a remix at
> any time without any formal process. The Fedora Remix "secondary mark"
> may be used on Remixes, providing some really simple guidelines are
> followed.
>
> I hope this helps clarify the situation. As soon as the trademark
> guidelines and Spins process are finalized (and we're pretty much
> there), we'll start pumping the message about these terms.
>
> Paul and Spot have been driving this process -- here are the relevant
> pages:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/New_trademark_guidelines
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/Secondary_trademark_usage_guidelines

Thanks for providing this summary Chris.

In the context of the "one Fedora package" question, it's important to
remember that the key goals of having Remixes are to (1) allow the
downstream to inherit some of Fedora's brand power, and (2) help the
downstream drive interest in Fedora as the upstream.

When I spoke with Red Hat Legal about this very issue, we didn't see a
need to draw a line at a specific package content level because we
felt that if someone is really driven to market Fedora because of
including one package, who are we to stop them? If there's a great
argument against this, though, we don't have to consider this
particular door closed.

--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-01-2009, 04:53 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for providing this summary Chris.
>
> In the context of the "one Fedora package" question, it's important to
> remember that the key goals of having Remixes are to (1) allow the
> downstream to inherit some of Fedora's brand power, and (2) help the
> downstream drive interest in Fedora as the upstream.

So here's the one question that I think will bake your noodle.
What if someone walked into the project and wanted to do a coronary
based distribution instead of a binary rpm distribution, using Fedora
srpms as source material?

reference: http://wiki.rpath.com/wiki/Conary:RPM_Package_Recipe_HOWTO

Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that
sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark?

-jef

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-01-2009, 06:07 PM
Matt Domsch
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

On Thu, Jan 01, 2009 at 08:53:31AM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for providing this summary Chris.
> >
> > In the context of the "one Fedora package" question, it's important to
> > remember that the key goals of having Remixes are to (1) allow the
> > downstream to inherit some of Fedora's brand power, and (2) help the
> > downstream drive interest in Fedora as the upstream.
>
> So here's the one question that I think will bake your noodle.
> What if someone walked into the project and wanted to do a coronary
> based distribution instead of a binary rpm distribution, using Fedora
> srpms as source material?
>
> reference: http://wiki.rpath.com/wiki/Conary:RPM_Package_Recipe_HOWTO
>
> Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that
> sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark?

yes, I would. I see remixes as an excellent way to push the boundries
of what Fedora (the distribution) is today, while still being a part
of Fedora (the community).

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-01-2009, 06:37 PM
Axel Thimm
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

On Thu, Jan 01, 2009 at 08:53:31AM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for providing this summary Chris.
> >
> > In the context of the "one Fedora package" question, it's important to
> > remember that the key goals of having Remixes are to (1) allow the
> > downstream to inherit some of Fedora's brand power, and (2) help the
> > downstream drive interest in Fedora as the upstream.
>
> So here's the one question that I think will bake your noodle.
> What if someone walked into the project and wanted to do a coronary
> based distribution instead of a binary rpm distribution, using Fedora
> srpms as source material?
>
> reference: http://wiki.rpath.com/wiki/Conary:RPM_Package_Recipe_HOWTO
>
> Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that
> sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark?

Probably closer to rpm packaging: What if there is someone that
rebuilds Fedora rpms optimized for $subarch or maybe build for
non-supported platforms?

I think currently the answer to all of the above is no.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-01-2009, 06:58 PM
"Jeff Spaleta"
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@atrpms.net> wrote:
> Probably closer to rpm packaging: What if there is someone that
> rebuilds Fedora rpms optimized for $subarch or maybe build for
> non-supported platforms?
>
> I think currently the answer to all of the above is no.

Assuming this is no. Are these cases covered by our secondary arch
initiative and if were done as secondary arches wouldn't they get
access to the primary mark?

-jef

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 01-02-2009, 06:29 AM
Max Spevack
 
Default Fedora Remix definition

On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, Jeff Spaleta wrote:

Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that
sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark?


I think the answer to this question needs to be yes. People have to
feel like they can experiment radically with the base that Fedora
provides, and that they can do it with the "blessing" of the larger
Project.


To do otherwise would be to stifle some innovative ideas while still in
the cradle. We should be encouraging people to try really outside the
box ideas. Some of them might end up being brought back to FESCo or
other parts of Fedora as truly innovative.


--Max

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:45 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org