[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       userlinux-discuss
Subject:    Re: [Discuss] Update on Metapackages
From:       Brock Frazier <eight_string () yahoo ! com>
Date:       2005-04-12 13:33:25
Message-ID: 20050412133325.11711.qmail () web32005 ! mail ! mud ! yahoo ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

--- "Benj. Mako Hill" <mako@atdot.cc> wrote:
> I have a number of remaining questions. I'd really
> like to release
> this soon so quick answers would be good:
> 
>  - What is the decision regarding the trademark
> policy? If I want to
>    upload these into Ubuntu, do I need to rename the
> packages? What
>    should I rename them to? Would "ul" or "usrlinux"
> work?
> 

The more abstracted the better. "usrlinux" is not
acceptable. I recommend something that states the
purpose of the packages, like "business-" or the like
(if possible). Remember, certifications are involved
with the UserLinux marks (name and logo) and thus if
they can go anywhere, the value of any forthcoming
certifications would be of limited worth. 

Mark Protection Policy:
http://www.userlinux.com/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Mark_Protection_Policy

The more I read that the more I wish it had been
written better. At least the first paragraph
communicates reasonably well:
"A quality that makes UserLinux unique is the mixture
of community-based development and openness with the
accompanying certifications. While defining
certification specifications should be an open
process, maintaining any value in anything UserLinux
certified also requires that the UserLinux name,
certification mark, and logo be held more closely.
Otherwise, the value of the UserLinux mark and
certification will be undermined."

...and there you have it. We want our certifications
to be as strong as possible while the software should
be very much free. The solution to this is abstraction
between the UserLinux name and logo (marks) and the
actual deb packages and whatever associated code.
Where we to date have failed was not having this
abstraction in place when wanted you to use UserLinux
packages. 

> 
> I'm doing development on these in a repository set
> up by Ghe. I guess
> you should talk to him if you want access and don't
> have it
> already. Currently my work is an a branch called
> "ubuntu" although I'd
> love to move it back into the mainline as soon as
> you guys give me the
> nod.
> 

Ideally, whenever the release of "business-" or
whatever name the packages end up with happens, you'll
be able to seamlessly merge those with whatever we are
working on at a future date. Specifically, there
shouldn't be a big operation to remove UserLinux marks
since they will already be abstracted.

As noted in the Mark Protection Policy:
"We expect people to stay with UserLinux because of
merit, not because the marks are used as an annoyance
to encourage lock-in. By making the marks more readily
removed, we are encouraging compliance with mark
protection guidelines."

In summary: Enjoy the software and thanks for your
contributions back. Don't run off with our
certification-related marks!


-Brock Frazier
 Boise, ID    USA


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.userlinux.com
http://lists.userlinux.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss
List administrator: bruce@perens.com 510-526-1165
Perens LLC / 1563 Solano Ave. / PMB 349 / Berkeley CA 94707 / USA

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]