On Sat, 23 Jan 1999, Chris Waters wrote: >Wichert Akkerman wrote: > >> I propose that we vote on accepting both the logo and the current >> license. > >I very much dislike the current license. I'm a debian developer, I'd >like to put the debian logo on my home page, but I do *not* necessarily >want to devote half or more of my home page to debian. I'd rather have >pointers to the debian web site, and let debian speak for itself. >Current (expired) license forbids this. > >I've previously raised issues about using the logo inside of packages >too -- this one may be addressed by the current license, but it's >certainly not clear. > >The logo should be a logo, it should be used to refer to or to advertise >debian. It should *mean* debian. The current license isn't even >*close* to filling this goal, imo.
[snip] >Debian is a free project to distribute a free OS. It should have a free >logo. FREE THE LOGO!! FREE THE LOGO!! :-) well then, that's all the more reason to have a vote, imho. i personally dislike the logo and agree with you about the license. since there are enough people raising concerns about the logo, i think a vote is warranted. what do you think? -ed