Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Benjamin Seidenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, > It seems to me that that particular text ("Debian Powered") makes more > sense as a button for a service on a box running debian. For a Debian > Derived Distribution, I think it would make more sense to > s/powered/derived/. Right, here it is:

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Julien BLACHE wrote: > Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > >>> >>> >> Something, yes. Maybe you could try to use the text only three times. >> > > OK, here it is with the text repeated only 3 times, in a closed

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, >> > > Something, yes. Maybe you could try to use the text only three times. OK, here it is with the text repeated only 3 times, in a closed circle around the swirl:

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Monday 03 July 2006 09:30, Yavor Doganov wrote: > Putting a note on the shop "We don't sell poison, it's not part of our > articles' list" does not actually mean that you don't when poison is > clearly available among other goods. Anyway, we'll never reach any > agreement and it's pointless to

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

This one time, at band camp, Yavor Doganov said: > On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:04:51 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > I'm sure RMS would love to be associated with Ubuntu as a > > contributor. > > No, he would not. Ubuntu, as well as Debian, unfortunately, contain > non-free software, and RMS has d

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 02:25:52PM +0200, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote: > On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 02:20:12PM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote: > > No, he would not. Ubuntu, as well as Debian, unfortunately, contain > > non-free software, and RMS has dedicated his life fighting against it. > debian does not

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 10:17:25PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 11:03:19PM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > Debian has a much more direct and special relationship to Ubuntu than Linus > > or RMS; I'm sure you can recognize that. > > Though I note the Ubuntu home page is ti

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Putting a note on the shop "We don't sell poison, it's not part of our > articles' list" does not actually mean that you don't when poison is > clearly available among other goods. That's not at all similar to debian. More like MacD's having rat poison in their

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, 03 Jul 2006 16:20:27 +0200, Loïc Minier wrote: > I'm obviously wrong, mea maxima culpa. I always considered I would > offer as good a support as I could for non-free software in Debian, and > with time I thought the distinction was here for the end-users, but > after re-reading the so

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006, Yavor Doganov wrote: > I have no intention to troll at all. No matter how repeatedly this is > explained, it is a fact. One can download non-free software from > Debian FTP servers, the official mirrors, it is being built by the > buildds, it is using the PTS/BTS, it's part

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006, Loïc Minier wrote: > Please > don't put Debian on the slippery slope where non-free is "not part of > debian" I'm obviously wrong, mea maxima culpa. I always considered I would offer as good a support as I cou

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I have no intention to troll at all. [...] Then please stop. There is no non-free software in the debian OS (modulo serious bugs), regardless of what's held on some systems. Being told to stop trolling in [EMAIL PROTECTED] does not mean it's a good idea to star

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 03:06:26PM +0200, Loïc Minier wrote: > On Mon, Jul 03, 2006, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote: > > debian does not contains non-free software. non-free is not part of > > debian, it's only supported using the same tools. > > The differences between main, contrib, and non-free are o

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, 03 Jul 2006 14:21:53 +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > Debian does not contain non-free software. Myself and others > explained this to you and like-minded people *at great length* > last month on https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion > Please do not knowingly troll debian-project.

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

=?iso-8859-1?Q?Lo=EFc?= Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > don't put Debian on the slippery slope where non-free is "not part of > debian", we already repeated our support for non-free in a GR. > Although it uses the infrastructure, I remind you: W

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Yavor Doganov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > No, he would not. Ubuntu, as well as Debian, unfortunately, contain > non-free software, and RMS has dedicated his life fighting against it. Debian does not contain non-free software. Myself and others explained this to you and like-minded people *at great len

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 11:03:19PM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > > Why didn't Ubuntu also make loud noises about how Linus or RMS are > > contributors to Ubuntu? There's a lot more of their work in there than a > > lot of Debian developers. I'm sure RMS would love to be associated with > > Ubunt

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006, Pierre HABOUZIT wrote: > debian does not contains non-free software. non-free is not part of > debian, it's only supported using the same tools. The differences between main, contrib, and non-free are only in the conditions required for the software sources to be therein.

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 02:20:12PM +0300, Yavor Doganov wrote: > On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:04:51 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > I'm sure RMS would love to be associated with Ubuntu as a > > contributor. > > No, he would not. Ubuntu, as well as Debian, unfortunately, contain > non-free software,

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 10:04:51 +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > I'm sure RMS would love to be associated with Ubuntu as a > contributor. No, he would not. Ubuntu, as well as Debian, unfortunately, contain non-free software, and RMS has dedicated his life fighting against it. -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECT

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, >> > > Something, yes. Maybe you could try to use the text only three times. Yes, this was a quick hack, I need to fiddle a bit more with Inkscape to get what I want :) JB. -- Julien BLACHE <

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

#include * Julien BLACHE [Fri, Jun 30 2006, 09:10:06PM]: > Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > What about creating a logo for a strategy similar to the Intel Inside > > campain? I imagine a simple circle of letters "Debian Powered" (in > > Debian-red) around the Swirl. > > Som

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Sat, Jul 01, 2006 at 10:04:51AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > That's because "contributor" has different connotations to "originator", > and many people did not like the associations between themselves and Ubuntu > that "contributor" conjured up. Exactly my point; there are differences of opin

Unbranding Debian? (was: Re: "Debian Powered" Logo)

> If we made it easy to rebrand Debian, that would encourage people to > resell it, and it would give us some control over how that rebranding > was done, allowing us to encourage them to promote themselves AND us! This is actually what has been made by the D-I team. Most parts of D-I are now unb

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 10:44:41AM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > In particular, Ubuntu has received harsh criticism from Debian developers in > the past for pointing out that they are, in effect, contributors to the > Ubuntu project. That's because "contributor" has different connotations to "ori

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 12:14:03PM -0500, Ean Schuessler wrote: > I never cared for their "de-branding" of Debian's work Well, it's not like they had a whole lot of choice in the matter. I have long felt that we should make it easy for third-parties to "rebrand" Debian. That would encourage peo

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 12:14:03PM -0500, Ean Schuessler wrote: > The Ubuntu site says that ubuntu means "I am what I am because of who we > all are". If Ubuntu is ready to live up that slogan and publicly > acknowledge that it is what it is *because* of its Debian origins, > rather than despite

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, > What about creating a logo for a strategy similar to the Intel Inside > campain? I imagine a simple circle of letters "Debian Powered" (in > Debian-red) around the Swirl. Something like this ?

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

Raphael Hertzog wrote: Indeed, that's why it's great that Ubuntu is ready to make it more obvious that they are Debian based. I very much agree. I never had a problem with the fact that Canonical is willing to capitalize improvements to Debian. I never cared for their "de-branding" of Debian

Re: "Debian Powered" Logo

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006, Eduard Bloch wrote: > > Mark Shuttleworth discussed this point with the DPL, and also with several > > other DD and we explained that the "Open use logo" has been precisely > > meant for this kind of use and that they can go ahead. > > What about creating a logo for a strategy

"Debian Powered" Logo

#include * Raphael Hertzog [Wed, Jun 28 2006, 12:17:45PM]: > > 9. It would be great if Ubuntu could advertise a bit more its Debian > > correlation by putting Debian logos in CD covers, background images, > > installer splashscreen, etc. Some kind of "Trademark policy" needs to be > > worked out