[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nope. Beastie is a way of life. I'd be quite upset if it were dropped
for whatever reason. It is so intimately tied to FreeBSD that it would
be a PR disaster if it were to be changed. NetBSD never had a real
The BSD daemon image stems from around 4.3BSD, or an even earlier
At 2:06 AM -0800 2/12/05, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
For the last time, it is not the contest that I and others are
objecting to.
I am glad to hear that this message was the last time you
mention it. Thanks.
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Programmer
Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> Are you intentionally misinterpreting me?
No, I'm correcting you.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[
On Feb 11, 2005, at 4:51 PM, Peter Risdon wrote:
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 15:56 -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 8:00 AM -0500 2/11/05, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
[...]
Since when did FreeBSD, a project always driven by volunteers and
not by commercial matters,
FreeBSD is a commercially viable operatin
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Garance A Drosehn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 1:59 PM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: Please don't change Beastie to another crap logo such as
NetBSD!!!
And frankly,
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
On Feb 11, 2005, at 2:18 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
That is so not true that it makes me almost as angry as the original
debate.
Maybe getting angry about a mere logo is a bad sign.
Just to sum up things as I understand it...
People want to chang
Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> > Copyright does not enter the equation at all. What matters is the
> > license.
> Uh ... where there is no copyright, there is no license. Where there is
> a license, there is a copyright.
Are you intentionally misint
Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> Copyright does not enter the equation at all. What matters is the
> license.
Uh ... where there is no copyright, there is no license. Where there is
a license, there is a copyright.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@fr
Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Joshua Tinnin writes:
> > I don't think you understand the history of FreeBSD. Many people who
> > work at Yahoo! are committers, and their employer not only knows about
> > this but encourages it.
> That's not good enough. The employer has to assign
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garance A
> Drosihn
> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 12:56 PM
> To: Bart Silverstrim; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Please don't change Beastie to another
> -Original Message-
> From: Garance A Drosehn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 1:59 PM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
> Subject: Re: Please don't change Beastie to another crap logo such as
> NetBSD!!!
>
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:16 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
many in no way means a majority. many is more than a few, where a few
is a handful (3-5 or so). There are probably more than a handful who
do it as more than a hobby. A lot of good people do it on their own
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> And the standard answer is RTFM
I don't know of anything in the manuals or on the Web site that answers
this type of question.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/m
On Feb 11, 2005, at 6:14 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
And the standard answer is RTFM
I don't know of anything in the manuals or on the Web site that answers
this type of question.
This is a mailing list for questions about how to use FreeBSD, not why
you should
athony atkielski =~ /tm452\d/ ?
--
If I write a signature, my emails will appear more personalised.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTE
On Feb 11, 2005, at 4:14 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
And the standard answer is RTFM
I don't know of anything in the manuals or on the Web site that answers
this type of question.
Typical. Cut out the rest of what I said.
You need to ask the right people, not t
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:56 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
CIOs don't hang out in public mailing lists asking such questions
But some of us hanging out on such lists have to answer these questions
when talking to CIOs. And saying "I don't know" just doesn't wash.
And
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> CIOs don't hang out in public mailing lists asking such questions
But some of us hanging out on such lists have to answer these questions
when talking to CIOs. And saying "I don't know" just doesn't wash.
--
Anthony
__
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> This is not the right place to ask such questions.
Why is it called freebsd-questions?
> If you are
> *seriously* concerned about this, and do not think that the FreeBSD
> core / foundation and their lawyers have not thought about this, then
> you should b
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> I don't know. Go ask them. Look in the codebase yourself, or pay
> someone to do so.
Is this what you would tell someone contemplating a multimillion-dollar
investment in a FreeBSD rollout to 10,000 servers? "I don't know"? "Look
it up yourself"?
This proj
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:51 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
You ask a dumb question, get such an answer.
Be sure to tell the CIOs that. That'll do wonders for adoption of
FreeBSD.
CIOs don't hang out in public mailing lists asking such questions
Chad
You make assump
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:46 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Joshua Tinnin writes:
I don't think you understand the history of FreeBSD. Many people who
work at Yahoo! are committers, and their employer not only knows about
this but encourages it.
That's not good enough. The employer has to assign its cop
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> You ask a dumb question, get such an answer.
Be sure to tell the CIOs that. That'll do wonders for adoption of
FreeBSD.
> You make assumptions that just because someone is paying someone to
> work on FreeBSD that no one has thought of the copyright implicat
Joshua Tinnin writes:
> Do you have any proof of malfeasence?
I don't need it. That's the way copyright normally works; it's not
malfeasance. In order to protect the project, the status of copyright
in all code written for the project must be very clearly established, in
writing.
> Are you pla
Joshua Tinnin writes:
> I don't think you understand the history of FreeBSD. Many people who
> work at Yahoo! are committers, and their employer not only knows about
> this but encourages it.
That's not good enough. The employer has to assign its copyrights as
well, or waive the usual work-for-h
Can I suggest a new mailing list - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter.
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 23:42 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
> Andrew L. Gould writes:
>
> > That's an assumption.
>
> The project needs to ask for proof of this, and not simply assume it.
>
> > We could as easily assume that the emplo
Andrew L. Gould writes:
> That's an assumption.
The project needs to ask for proof of this, and not simply assume it.
> We could as easily assume that the employers:
Never assume anything in law. A wrong assumption could bury the
project.
--
Anthony
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:40 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
Their employers are paying them TO WORK on FreeBSD. They are not
taking
their code that they write for their employers and also sticking it in
FreeBSD. Big difference.
Not if their work consists of writing c
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:30 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
Look in the codebase
No, tell me right here. CIOs aren't going to look in the codebase to
try to find out if it's legal for them to use the operating system.
You ask a dumb question, get such an answer.
You m
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> Sorry, but the employers are freely offering the code and assigning
> copyrights as necessary.
OK, as long as the copyrights are assigned before any of the code finds
its way into the released product.
--
Anthony
__
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> Their employers are paying them TO WORK on FreeBSD. They are not taking
> their code that they write for their employers and also sticking it in
> FreeBSD. Big difference.
Not if their work consists of writing code. In that case, the copyright
in the code b
On Friday 11 February 2005 02:13 pm, Anthony Atkielski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Laszlo writes:
> > I wouldnt say many, there are few commiters who are actually paid
> > to work on it, most commiters/developers do it as a hobby.
>
> What written agreements do these committers have with th
On Friday 11 February 2005 02:16 pm, Anthony Atkielski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> > many in no way means a majority. many is more than a few, where a
> > few is a handful (3-5 or so). There are probably more than a
> > handful who do it as more than a hobb
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> Look in the codebase
No, tell me right here. CIOs aren't going to look in the codebase to
try to find out if it's legal for them to use the operating system.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing
On Friday 11 February 2005 04:11 pm, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
> Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> > Many of the people that work
> > on it are paid to work on it by their employers, who are using it
> > commercially.
>
> That would mean that their employers hold a copyright in the FreeBSD
> cod
Frank Laszlo writes:
> I was refering to commiters paid BY FreeBSD to provide code.
Ah ... I am reassured! You should always make that crystal-clear
whenever you mention this in discussions with anybody. Any rumor
started to the contrary could kill off interest in the OS in anyone
considering i
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:16 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
many in no way means a majority. many is more than a few, where a few
is a handful (3-5 or so). There are probably more than a handful who
do it as more than a hobby. A lot of good people do it on their own
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:13 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Frank Laszlo writes:
I wouldnt say many, there are few commiters who are actually paid to
work on it, most commiters/developers do it as a hobby.
What written agreements do these committers have with their employers?
Normally, if you are paid to
On Feb 11, 2005, at 3:11 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
Many of the people that work
on it are paid to work on it by their employers, who are using it
commercially.
That would mean that their employers hold a copyright in the FreeBSD
code written by their employees
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Frank Laszlo writes:
I wouldnt say many, there are few commiters who are actually paid to
work on it, most commiters/developers do it as a hobby.
What written agreements do these committers have with their employers?
Normally, if you are paid to write something by y
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> many in no way means a majority. many is more than a few, where a few
> is a handful (3-5 or so). There are probably more than a handful who
> do it as more than a hobby. A lot of good people do it on their own
> time as well, and I salute that. But a lo
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 4:34 PM -0500 2/11/05, Frank Laszlo wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
FreeBSD is driven by commercial matters. Many of the people that
work on it are paid to work on it by their employers, who are
using it commercially.
I wouldnt say many, there are few commit
Frank Laszlo writes:
> I wouldnt say many, there are few commiters who are actually paid to
> work on it, most commiters/developers do it as a hobby.
What written agreements do these committers have with their employers?
Normally, if you are paid to write something by your employer, your
employe
On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 21:31 -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
> What if they put it
> to a vote and the userbase all votes for logos that clearly
> represent the Beastie image? What will have been the point of
> the contest?
I am a FreeBSD user. I read and sometimes respond to several of the
lis
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> Many of the people that work
> on it are paid to work on it by their employers, who are using it
> commercially.
That would mean that their employers hold a copyright in the FreeBSD
code written by their employees; this is a classic implicit
work-for-hire ar
At 4:34 PM -0500 2/11/05, Frank Laszlo wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
FreeBSD is driven by commercial matters. Many of the people that
work on it are paid to work on it by their employers, who are
using it commercially.
I wouldnt say many, there are few commiters who are actually paid
t
At 10:09 PM -0800 2/10/05, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> While you seem determined to pretend that Robert Watson is
> somehow the sole person interested in this, let me note I am
> one of the FreeBSD committers who would like to see some new
> ideas for a logo.
Good. At least you have my respect n
On Feb 11, 2005, at 2:34 PM, Frank Laszlo wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Feb 11, 2005, at 6:00 AM, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
Since when did FreeBSD, a project always driven by volunteers and
not by commercial matters, suddenly gain a marketing department that
is trying to steer FreeBS
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 15:56 -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 8:00 AM -0500 2/11/05, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
[...]
> >Since when did FreeBSD, a project always driven by volunteers and
> >not by commercial matters,
FreeBSD is a commercially viable operating system. I happen to think
it's the be
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 12:04:34 -0600, "Andrew L. Gould"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 11 February 2005 08:14 am, Dag-Erling Smrgrav wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > Imagine Linux dropping Tux for some meanlingless, lifeless logo?
> >
> > I'm glad you asked.
> >
> > Tux is a mascot
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Feb 11, 2005, at 6:00 AM, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
Since when did FreeBSD, a project always driven by volunteers and not
by commercial matters, suddenly gain a marketing department that is
trying to steer FreeBSD into the business sector? Is FreeBSD
starting
> http://www.bellsystemmemorial.com/bell_logos.html
I'm not sure that 6 times in 110 years is "constantly changed"
--
If I write a signature, my emails will appear more personalised.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd
On Fri, 2005-02-11 at 08:00 -0500, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
>
> Someone said people change logos all the time. That's flat out wrong.
> When a company spends mucho dinero on marketing their logo, they don't
> just flip around and decide to change their logo that they spent so
> much money and
On Feb 11, 2005, at 6:00 AM, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
Since when did FreeBSD, a project always driven by volunteers and not
by commercial matters, suddenly gain a marketing department that is
trying to steer FreeBSD into the business sector? Is FreeBSD starting
to have marketing dictate technolo
At 8:00 AM -0500 2/11/05, Bart Silverstrim wrote:
Just to sum up things as I understand it...
People want to change the logo from Beastie to something else
because Beastie isn't professional enough, so some committers
decided to hold a contest for a new logo?
We thought it would be nice, after fift
On Friday 11 February 2005 08:14 am, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > Imagine Linux dropping Tux for some meanlingless, lifeless logo?
>
> I'm glad you asked.
>
> Tux is a mascot, not a logo. These are Linux logos:
>
> http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topiccaldera.gif
>
Frank Laszlo writes:
> Are we forgetting about the printing aspect of things? The redhat logo
> has some nice gradients in it.
The GIF I'm looking at seems to contain only red and black, except for
the drop shadow, which isn't part of the logo.
> And they just plain suck, IMHO.
They look too pu
On Feb 11, 2005, at 12:17 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Napper writes:
Its been my experience that the corporate suits get the
perception of "teenage hacker" from the cartoonish mascots.
Agreed. And their perception is not always incorrect.
Am I the only one that finds some amusement in the referen
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
Tux is a mascot, not a logo. These are Linux logos:
http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topiccaldera.gif
http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topicdebian.gif
http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topicmandrake.gif
http://images.slashdot.org/topics/to
Napper writes:
> Its been my experience that the corporate suits get the
> perception of "teenage hacker" from the cartoonish mascots.
Agreed. And their perception is not always incorrect.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
h
Dag-Erling Smørgrav writes:
> Tux is a mascot, not a logo. These are Linux logos:
>
> http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topiccaldera.gif
> http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topicdebian.gif
> http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topicmandrake.gif
> http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topicredhat.gif
>
Louis LeBlanc writes:
> They why would they care *what* the logo is?
They wouldn't; but the logo has an effect on the people who write the
checks, and it serves a useful purpose as a unifying identifier.
The people who write the checks don't care about "skins," though, since
they'll never actual
Bart Silverstrim writes:
> People want to change the logo from Beastie to something else because
> Beastie isn't professional enough, so some committers decided to hold a
> contest for a new logo?
Beastie isn't a logo. There is no logo for FreeBSD at the moment.
Creating one is probably a good i
People want to change the logo from Beastie to something else because
Beastie isn't professional enough, so some committers decided to hold a
contest for a new logo?
As an artist here is how I see it: Beastie is a mascot, not a logo.
It's like having "Disney" with a Mickey Mouse. The logo is eith
* Bart Silverstrim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [0201 13:01]:
>
> On Feb 11, 2005, at 2:18 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
>
> >Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
> >
> >>That is so not true that it makes me almost as angry as the original
> >>debate.
> >
> >Maybe getting angry about a mere logo is a bad sign.
>
> Ju
On Feb 11, 2005, at 8:53 AM, Greg Barniskis wrote:
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
Out of curiosity, is Beastie so terrible, a logo, that a business
would be stupid enough to base their server decisions based on it?
Would you care if a business were that dumb...would you actually
*want* them using it?
On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 07:53:17 -0600
Greg Barniskis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bart Silverstrim wrote:
>
> > Out of curiosity, is Beastie so terrible, a logo, that a business would
> > be stupid enough to base their server decisions based on it? Would you
> > care if a business were that dumb.
Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
Here's a page (a NetBSD logo contest entry) which addresses many of
these concerns, and coincidentally underlines my point about the
daemon not being exclusive to FreeBSD:
http://homepage.mac.com/codesamurai/netbsd-logo-entry/
That is not bad. But is it sufficiently diffe
On 02/11/05 09:52 AM, Anthony Atkielski sat at the `puter and typed:
> Mike Hauber writes:
>
> > Heh... This gives me an idea... How about FreeBSD "skins." The
> > Beastie as the default (of course), and dis_ey-type themes for
> > the "weak in the faith". If FreeBSD's attempt is not to be
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Imagine Linux dropping Tux for some meanlingless, lifeless logo?
I'm glad you asked.
Tux is a mascot, not a logo. These are Linux logos:
http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topiccaldera.gif
http://images.slashdot.org/topics/topicdebian.gif
http://images.slashdot.org/to
Bart Silverstrim wrote:
Out of curiosity, is Beastie so terrible, a logo, that a business would
be stupid enough to base their server decisions based on it? Would you
care if a business were that dumb...would you actually *want* them using
it?
The problem (from my point of view) really has a lo
On Feb 11, 2005, at 2:18 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
That is so not true that it makes me almost as angry as the original
debate.
Maybe getting angry about a mere logo is a bad sign.
Just to sum up things as I understand it...
People want to change the logo from Beastie to
Mike Hauber writes:
> Heh... This gives me an idea... How about FreeBSD "skins." The
> Beastie as the default (of course), and dis_ey-type themes for
> the "weak in the faith". If FreeBSD's attempt is not to be
> offensive to anyone, anywhere, anytime, then perhaps it just
> needs to jump i
On Friday 11 February 2005 12:31 am, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> There can be only ONE 'flagship' logo just as there is only one
> company name in a conglomerate. But there is plenty of space
> for different subsidiary marks for the product.
>
> For example, Chevrolet, Buick, Saturn, these are all p
Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
> That is so not true that it makes me almost as angry as the original
> debate.
Maybe getting angry about a mere logo is a bad sign.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman
> -Original Message-
> From: Garance A Drosehn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 1:17 PM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
> Subject: RE: Please don't change Beastie to another crap logo such as
> NetBSD!!!
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Garance A Drosehn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 1:17 PM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
> Subject: RE: Please don't change Beastie to another crap logo such as
> NetBSD!!!
&g
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Garance A
> Drosehn
> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 11:26 AM
> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Please don't change Beastie to another crap logo such
At 12:50 AM -0800 2/10/05, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
No, sorry. The core team apparently feels that the way to do things
now is to made decisions of this nature first, then have discussion
later, rather than the reverse which previously has been the case.
This contest came out because the developers
At 12:50 AM -0800 2/10/05, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
It is clear from
reading both lists that much of the anger is based upon false
assumptions, misinformation and incomplete editing of the leaked
document.
Sorry, but that is false.
Much of the anger is based on Robert Watson (and whatever other
Louis LeBlanc writes:
> If there were a *reasonable* basis for changing, I would be in favor
> of the proposed change. Sadly, but in favor nonetheless. The
> "business" reasons mentioned are not sound given the fact that there
> are *real* devils used as mascots and logos in the food, sports, an
On 02/10/05 02:26 PM, Garance A Drosehn sat at the `puter and typed:
> At 10:59 AM -0500 2/10/05, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
> > >
> > > Logos need to be as neutral as possible, since they will be
> > > very widely used and very heavily imprinted in customers'
> > > minds. They must not conjure up t
At 10:59 AM -0500 2/10/05, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
>
> Logos need to be as neutral as possible, since they will be
> very widely used and very heavily imprinted in customers'
> minds. They must not conjure up thoughts of anything except
> the brand they represent.
Neutrality is purely objective
On 02/09/05 09:45 PM, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC sat at the `puter and typed:
>
> On Feb 9, 2005, at 3:50 PM, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
>
> > And in the past, I've only ever worn or
> > used logos if they were for the Red Sox, the Patriots (and even those
> > sparingly), or a free shirt. Hey, free i
On Feb 9, 2005, at 3:50 PM, Louis LeBlanc wrote:
And in the past, I've only ever worn or
used logos if they were for the Red Sox, the Patriots (and even those
sparingly), or a free shirt. Hey, free is free, right?
What, no Celtics?
I will admit to having bought lots of Apple shirts and a Celtics s
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 07:09 pm, - wrote:
> http://www.petitiononline.com/fbsdmsc1/petition.html
>
> Julien Gabel wrote:
> >>>See the thread "The FreeBSD Project is announcing a public
> >>> competition for the new logo design. " in -advocacy - I've
> >>> already replied with my views on
http://www.petitiononline.com/fbsdmsc1/petition.html
Julien Gabel wrote:
See the thread "The FreeBSD Project is announcing a public competition
for the new logo design. " in -advocacy - I've already replied with
my views on the subject, along the same lines as your comments.
I'm not s
On 02/09/05 11:10 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] sat at the `puter and typed:
> On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 10:56:34PM +0100, Oliver Leitner wrote:
> > i think the threadstarter was asking a question, and he just put his own
> > opinion to it, i think thats a good reason why it should come to this
> > mailing
On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 10:56:34PM +0100, Oliver Leitner wrote:
> i think the threadstarter was asking a question, and he just put his own
> opinion to it, i think thats a good reason why it should come to this
> mailinglist, after all it fits the two major reasons, why there are
> mailinglists.
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 22:56, Frank Laszlo wrote:
> Oliver Leitner wrote:
> >On Wednesday 09 February 2005 22:33, Mark Rowlands wrote:
> >>On Wednesday 09 February 2005 21:06, Timothy Luoma wrote:
> >>>On Feb 9, 2005, at 1:56 PM, Chad Morland wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 18:48:19 +,
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 07:11 pm, Mark Ovens wrote:
> Louis LeBlanc wrote:
> > On 02/09/05 04:32 PM, Charles-André Landemaine sat at the `puter and
typed:
> >> This will sign the death of FreeBSD.
> >>
> >> How could they believe such crap?! Who said beastie is evil?! This is
> >> totally no
Oliver Leitner wrote:
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 22:33, Mark Rowlands wrote:
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 21:06, Timothy Luoma wrote:
On Feb 9, 2005, at 1:56 PM, Chad Morland wrote:
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 18:48:19 +, Mark Ovens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
See the thread
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 22:33, Mark Rowlands wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 February 2005 21:06, Timothy Luoma wrote:
> > On Feb 9, 2005, at 1:56 PM, Chad Morland wrote:
> > > On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 18:48:19 +, Mark Ovens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >> See the thread "The FreeBSD Pr
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 21:06, Timothy Luoma wrote:
> On Feb 9, 2005, at 1:56 PM, Chad Morland wrote:
> > On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 18:48:19 +, Mark Ovens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > wrote:
> >> See the thread "The FreeBSD Project is announcing a public competition
> >> for the new logo design.
Le 09/02/2005 à 16:32:42-0200, Charles-André Landemaine a écrit
> This will sign the death of FreeBSD.
>
> How could they believe such crap?! Who said beastie is evil?! This is
> totally non-sense, it's a logo, it's not the CD cover of a heavy-metal
> release...!
>
> I think the reasons are the
On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 11:28:37AM -0800, sp0ng3b0b wrote:
> Change is good. Time to try something different. I think some folks
> should relax and not get too upset. There are worse things going on in
> the world...
Nope. Beastie is a way of life. I'd be quite upset if it were dropped
for whate
On Feb 9, 2005, at 1:56 PM, Chad Morland wrote:
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 18:48:19 +, Mark Ovens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
See the thread "The FreeBSD Project is announcing a public competition
for the new logo design. " in -advocacy - I've already replied
with
my views on the subject, along t
I think we all are happy with beastie, there is no reason to change
it, if some idiots think it's evil, that's their problem.
I hope no one sends a new logo for the contest, and if what FreeBSD
Project wants is a new "FreeBSD" type of font, or style, then do it,
but don't blow beastie away.
It wo
"if we dont take care of the little things around us, what right do we have
to be upset on the bigger ones?"
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 20:28, sp0ng3b0b wrote:
> Charles-André Landemaine wrote:
> > This will sign the death of FreeBSD.
> > Oh please, wake me up, it's a nightmare!!!
>
> Come on
On Wednesday 09 February 2005 12:58 pm, Julien Gabel wrote:
> >> See the thread "The FreeBSD Project is announcing a public
> >> competition for the new logo design. " in -advocacy - I've
> >> already replied with my views on the subject, along the same lines
> >> as your comments.
> >
> > I'm
1 - 100 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
