Mark,

There are two boats here: the ASF and Lucene/Solr.  Not rocking one will rock 
the other.

My point in bringing up the possibility of a vote was not to establish 
consensus (which I think we have already reached: as you say, no need to rock 
the boat), but rather to go on record for the board about our explicit decision 
not to follow this aspect of the ASF branding requirements.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Miller [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 10:32 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images

I like to live in the majority for this type of thing :)  Our logo's 
seem happy enough to me. I don't see any need to rock the boat.

Our logos and names are protected regardless, and it seems energy is 
better spent elsewhere.

I don't think it's a big deal either way, but that itself is why I would 
vote to just stay pat.

If 90%+ of the other projects did it, it would have a lot more weight 
with me.

bq. Thoughts?

I do think it's better to discuss than jump to a vote - even if we have 
discussed before. I strongly believe almost all votes are a last resort, 
not a matter of course. The exceptions being voting in new contributors 
and for releases. I think the best course of action for these things is 
to bring it up again, reference the previous discussion, then if it 
needs to go to a vote due to lack of consensus, we start a vote. I know 
you brought up discussing before moving to the vote - but this is my 
response to "Thoughts?".

My personal opinion, so FWIW.

- Mark

On 09/28/2012 09:11 AM, Steven A Rowe wrote:
> I did a survey of the 184 ASF projects listed on this page: 
> <http://projects.apache.org/indexes/alpha.html> - this is a list of products, 
> not top-level projects, e.g. Lucene Core and Solr are listed separately.
>
> I counted 77 of the 184 (42%) with some form of TM next to at least one 
> graphic image on the site (e.g., Commons products' sites often have TM on the 
> Commons logo, but not on the product logo - I counted these among the 77).  A 
> fair number of the 184 are no longer active (i.e., in the Attic), though, so 
> the percentage of active project with TMs in graphic images is somewhat 
> higher than 42%, maybe something like 45%.
>
> Almost all of the 77 incorporate the TM in the graphic images, rather than 
> placing textual TMs adjacent to the images.
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Muir [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 8:17 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] TM in website graphic images
>
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Steven A Rowe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>          ... ensure that it
>>          includes a small "TM" symbol in the graphic or
>>          immediately adjacent to it. For pages that include the
>>          poject logo on them, ensure you mention "... and the
>>          Project logo are trademarks..." in the attribution.
>>
>> There is no room for interpretation here: the requirements say that it must 
>> be done.
>>
> I dunno, this seems like there is some room for interpretation.
> Looking at the old threads it seemed some people didnt want the image
> quality screwed up, thats all.
>
> I interpret the statement as "its also ok to add some html that puts a
> little TM next to the graphic". Maybe this would be easier to
> implement and less controversial.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to