Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 11:06 +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
> My suggestion (which I also brought up further down in this thread) is
> that you *slightly* distinguish your project from Arch Linux by adding a
> small change to the logo. The word "ARM" in small letters in the lower
> right corner of the Arch logo would probably look nice.

http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/styles/simplecorp/imageset/ALARM-2.png

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[John K Pate]

> Now, what's the confusion here? People seem to think that you are part
> of the main Arch Linux project and are thus confused as to why you have
> separate forums.

I've only seen one person express confusion on this point... is this
really a problem?

-- 
John K Pate http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/s0930006/

The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Thomas Bächler]

Am 09.07.2012 22:03, schrieb Kevin Mihelich:
> Around March/April 2011, we contacted Aaron Griffin and got
> explicit permission to rename our distribution to Arch Linux ARM since we
> were rapidly expanding our focus from plug computers to a wide variety of
> ARM platforms, and had also brought our packages and overall philosophy in
> line with upstream.

Before I say anything, I want to emphasize that I very much like what
you guys do and have done.

Now, what's the confusion here? People seem to think that you are part
of the main Arch Linux project and are thus confused as to why you have
separate forums.

My suggestion (which I also brought up further down in this thread) is
that you *slightly* distinguish your project from Arch Linux by adding a
small change to the logo. The word "ARM" in small letters in the lower
right corner of the Arch logo would probably look nice. Or, some picture
that people would associate with ARM, like a small representation of a
SoC computer.

That said, other Arch Linux derivatives should probably do the same
(Arch Bang could add a small explosion to the logo, ...).

To clarify: These are only suggestions, I don't want anyone to feel
otherwise. Feel free to disagree and ignore me.

> I'd be more than happy to work with more developers from upstream, and I
> just want to re-emphasize that we're in no way some rogue derivative flying
> your flag.

Let me emphasize that while I never used AL ARM myself, I only heard
positive things about it so far.

I can assure you that nobody inside the Arch team has expressed any
negative feelings towards your project.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 19:54 +0200, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> Am 09.07.2012 18:44, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
> > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM, David C. Rankin
> >  wrote:
> >> On 07/09/2012 11:16 AM, Daniel Wallace wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate
> >>> project.  The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and
> >>> archlinux-ppc are seperate as well.
> >>
> >>
> >> G. Thanks Daniel,
> >>
> >>   That's what was confusing -- ARM certainly looks official flying the Arch
> >> Linux trademarked logo, etc
> >>
> >>   So I guess anyone can create any forum and fly the Arch logo? Sounds like
> >> a "cease and desist" letter would fix that problem.
> > 
> > Notice that some use of our trademark by derivatives is allowed[0].
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Tom
> > (who recently started using ArchLinux ARM and is a big fan)
> > 
> > [0]:
> > 
> 
> Judging from a brief read of that paragraph I would even conclude that
> they cannot really use our name and trademark directly as they changed
> too much. :-)
> 
> They chose to be completely independent from us which has up- and
> downsides. And as lots of other derivatives thy implemented their own
> tools and infrastructure.
> 
> It'll be interesting what could happen in the future. E.g. there was
> once an independent port of Arch called Arch64 which was merged into
> Arch itself some day and we started to officially support x86_64. I
> don't see such things happen any time soon if at all. But if we indeed
> see capable hardware at some point and we developers start using the arm
> port such things might happen naturally. That being said, I am happy
> that people are already working on such a port.
> 
> Back to topic: I see how users might get confused by naming and logos.
> The same happens with archlinuxppc.org. But I'd rather not have a strict
> policy about trademark use and enforcing it (see how the Debian/Mozilla
> -> Iceweasel/Firefox issue did any good). Maybe we can encourage the arm
> people to work more closely with us though.
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Pierre

The logo is including typography and so it differs exactly as wanted by
the policy
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/styles/simplecorp/imageset/ALARM-2.png
a more famous example for "typography" can be a "logo"
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3c/Cocacola_cyrilic.JPG/170px-Cocacola_cyrilic.JPG

http://www.archlinux.org/art/ >
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:TrademarkPolicy

- Ralf

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Karol Blazewicz]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Oon-Ee Ng  wrote:
> On Jul 10, 2012 4:03 AM, "Kevin Mihelich"  wrote:
>> I'd be more than happy to work with more developers from upstream, and I
>> just want to re-emphasize that we're in no way some rogue derivative
> flying
>> your flag.  If anyone wants to get involved or learn more about what goes
>> on, feel free to contact me by email or on IRC.
>
> I thought this would have been obvious from the outset, actually. Am
> surprised how quickly trademark and "cease and desist" letters got
> mentioned in a mailing list for an open source project...

The link I posted refers to a site that's down atm
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=115643 and so are the links
to tinycore forums:
http://jeffhoogland.blogspot.com/2011/03/tiny-core-fraud-on-source-forge.html
http://sourceforge.net/blog/another-lesson-learned-clear-communication-is-key



On topic: I don't see the point of creating unified forums but keeping
e.g. bugtrackers separate.

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Oon-Ee Ng]

On Jul 10, 2012 4:03 AM, "Kevin Mihelich"  wrote:
> I'd be more than happy to work with more developers from upstream, and I
> just want to re-emphasize that we're in no way some rogue derivative
flying
> your flag.  If anyone wants to get involved or learn more about what goes
> on, feel free to contact me by email or on IRC.

I thought this would have been obvious from the outset, actually. Am
surprised how quickly trademark and "cease and desist" letters got
mentioned in a mailing list for an open source project...

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Kevin Mihelich]

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:35 PM, David C. Rankin <
drankina...@suddenlinkmail.com> wrote:

> On 07/09/2012 12:54 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:
>
>> Judging from a brief read of that paragraph I would even conclude that
>> they cannot really use our name and trademark directly as they changed
>> too much. :-)
>>
>> They chose to be completely independent from us which has up- and
>> downsides. And as lots of other derivatives thy implemented their own
>> tools and infrastructure.
>>
>
> My point wasn't to spear the site -- in a way, the more and different
> variations of Arch -- the better. The original thought that provoked the
> discussion was link to ARM forum thread that dealt exactly with the
> util-linux conflicts I see on my box. When I followed the link to
> http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/**viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467I
>  was presented with what looked like an Arch site but required a separate
> login/pass to post. (no big deal, just confusing). I just wanted to make
> sure that there were not 2 forums for different issues in Arch. (I couldn't
> see why there would be, but it was confusing enough to point it out)
>
> Thanks for the info and clarification Tom/Pierre, all. Learning occurred.
> Looks like the ARM folks have shadow issues to solve as well :)
>
>
> --
> David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
>
>
>
Hi everyone.  I'm the lead developer for Arch Linux ARM, and I just want to
jump in with a few clarifications to clear up any confusion.  Regarding the
name, we didn't just decide to use it out of the blue.  The distribution
was originally called PlugApps, and was designed to only run on plug
computers.  Around March/April 2011, we contacted Aaron Griffin and got
explicit permission to rename our distribution to Arch Linux ARM since we
were rapidly expanding our focus from plug computers to a wide variety of
ARM platforms, and had also brought our packages and overall philosophy in
line with upstream.

Arch Linux ARM is a direct port of Arch Linux, not so much a derivative or
variation in my opinion.  What happens upstream is matched exactly on our
side except where deviations, patches, or changes are needed to compile or
run on the ARM architectures we support.  Upstream package updates are
processed daily, built, and distributed to our (comparably tiny) network of
mirrors.  If you'd like more information on how I manage all of this I'd be
glad to oblige.

Our websites for the main page and the forum are markedly different from
the main Arch site and forum from my point of view.  While it would of
course be nice to have a single sign-on or merged system, that's not what
we have nor what we sought.  The other ports of Arch to other architectures
and the other derivatives have always remained separate entities, so we
followed suit in keeping ours separate.  A lot of our issues are also very
different from what x86 users experience, since many originate from
hardware-, bootloader-, or kernel-specific quirks.  If you really want all
that crap in your forum, we can talk further about that.

Regarding working closer with upstream, we have worked with a handful of
the developers and TUs on different things.  Generally after they've
started using our distribution and discover some issue on a package they
maintain upstream.  Whereas upstream has a brigade of folks to handle
packages, for us there is really just me so some things slip through the
cracks.  I've also taken the time to introduce Dan McGee to how the
distribution operates internally, specifically in regard to the automated
build system I have in place.

I'd be more than happy to work with more developers from upstream, and I
just want to re-emphasize that we're in no way some rogue derivative flying
your flag.  If anyone wants to get involved or learn more about what goes
on, feel free to contact me by email or on IRC.

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[David C. Rankin]

On 07/09/2012 12:54 PM, Pierre Schmitz wrote:

Judging from a brief read of that paragraph I would even conclude that
they cannot really use our name and trademark directly as they changed
too much. :-)

They chose to be completely independent from us which has up- and
downsides. And as lots of other derivatives thy implemented their own
tools and infrastructure.


My point wasn't to spear the site -- in a way, the more and different 
variations of Arch -- the better. The original thought that provoked the 
discussion was link to ARM forum thread that dealt exactly with the util-linux 
conflicts I see on my box. When I followed the link to 
http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467 I was presented 
with what looked like an Arch site but required a separate login/pass to post. 
(no big deal, just confusing). I just wanted to make sure that there were not 
2 forums for different issues in Arch. (I couldn't see why there would be, but 
it was confusing enough to point it out)


Thanks for the info and clarification Tom/Pierre, all. Learning occurred. 
Looks like the ARM folks have shadow issues to solve as well :)



--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Pierre Schmitz]

Am 09.07.2012 18:44, schrieb Tom Gundersen:
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM, David C. Rankin
>  wrote:
>> On 07/09/2012 11:16 AM, Daniel Wallace wrote:
>>>
>>> Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate
>>> project.  The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and
>>> archlinux-ppc are seperate as well.
>>
>>
>> G. Thanks Daniel,
>>
>>   That's what was confusing -- ARM certainly looks official flying the Arch
>> Linux trademarked logo, etc
>>
>>   So I guess anyone can create any forum and fly the Arch logo? Sounds like
>> a "cease and desist" letter would fix that problem.
> 
> Notice that some use of our trademark by derivatives is allowed[0].
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Tom
> (who recently started using ArchLinux ARM and is a big fan)
> 
> [0]:
> 

Judging from a brief read of that paragraph I would even conclude that
they cannot really use our name and trademark directly as they changed
too much. :-)

They chose to be completely independent from us which has up- and
downsides. And as lots of other derivatives thy implemented their own
tools and infrastructure.

It'll be interesting what could happen in the future. E.g. there was
once an independent port of Arch called Arch64 which was merged into
Arch itself some day and we started to officially support x86_64. I
don't see such things happen any time soon if at all. But if we indeed
see capable hardware at some point and we developers start using the arm
port such things might happen naturally. That being said, I am happy
that people are already working on such a port.

Back to topic: I see how users might get confused by naming and logos.
The same happens with archlinuxppc.org. But I'd rather not have a strict
policy about trademark use and enforcing it (see how the Debian/Mozilla
-> Iceweasel/Firefox issue did any good). Maybe we can encourage the arm
people to work more closely with us though.

Greetings,

Pierre

-- 
Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Thomas Bächler]

Am 09.07.2012 18:23, schrieb Mateusz Loskot:
> p.s. I agree the official logo makes the ArchLinux ARM status confusing.

Maybe we should ask them to use a slightly modified logo (maybe include
a microchip into the logo, or another small device).

I don't remember what the agreement with Arch Linux ARM was exactly
regarding their logo.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Leonid Isaev]

On Mon, 09 Jul 2012 11:21:29 -0500
"David C. Rankin"  wrote:

> On 07/09/2012 11:16 AM, Daniel Wallace wrote:
> > Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate
> > project.  The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and
> > archlinux-ppc are seperate as well.
> 
> G. Thanks Daniel,
> 
>That's what was confusing -- ARM certainly looks official flying the Arch 
> Linux trademarked logo, etc
> 
>So I guess anyone can create any forum and fly the Arch logo? Sounds like
> a "cease and desist" letter would fix that problem.
> 

ArchlinuxARM is a great project, and is fully compatible with archlinux. But
as any ARM-based system, you have to use your brain before reading their wiki.

They don't violate any copyrights, nor do I think anyone cares of those. So
there is no need for lawyers.

-- 
Leonid Isaev
GnuPG key: 0x164B5A6D
Fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE  775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Tom Gundersen]

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM, David C. Rankin
 wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 11:16 AM, Daniel Wallace wrote:
>>
>> Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate
>> project.  The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and
>> archlinux-ppc are seperate as well.
>
>
> G. Thanks Daniel,
>
>   That's what was confusing -- ARM certainly looks official flying the Arch
> Linux trademarked logo, etc
>
>   So I guess anyone can create any forum and fly the Arch logo? Sounds like
> a "cease and desist" letter would fix that problem.

Notice that some use of our trademark by derivatives is allowed[0].

Cheers,

Tom
(who recently started using ArchLinux ARM and is a big fan)

[0]: 

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 9 July 2012 17:16, Daniel Wallace  wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 11:06:55AM -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
>> On 07/09/2012 10:52 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:> Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
>> >
>> > http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
>>
>>   Why do we have different forum systems with different login
>> requirements for different Arch issues? Seem like KISS would dictate
>> - 1 system and 1 login for all forum issues...
>>
>> Is there some logic that tells us which issues should go to the
>> regular forum and which go to the ARM forum?
>
> Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate
> project.  The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and
> archlinux-ppc are seperate as well.

These are the bits I've been missing, thanks for clarification.

p.s. I agree the official logo makes the ArchLinux ARM status confusing.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[David C. Rankin]

On 07/09/2012 11:16 AM, Daniel Wallace wrote:

Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate
project.  The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and
archlinux-ppc are seperate as well.


G. Thanks Daniel,

  That's what was confusing -- ARM certainly looks official flying the Arch 
Linux trademarked logo, etc


  So I guess anyone can create any forum and fly the Arch logo? Sounds like a 
"cease and desist" letter would fix that problem.


--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[rafael ff1]

2012/7/9 Daniel Wallace :
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 11:06:55AM -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
>> On 07/09/2012 10:52 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:> Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
>> >
>> > http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
>>
>>   Why do we have different forum systems with different login
>> requirements for different Arch issues? Seem like KISS would dictate
>> - 1 system and 1 login for all forum issues...
>>
>>   Is there some logic that tells us which issues should go to the
>> regular forum and which go to the ARM forum?
>>
>> --
>> David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
>>
>
> Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate
> project.  The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and
> archlinux-ppc are seperate as well.
>

As can be confirmed in here:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Based_Distributions_(Active)

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Daniel Wallace]

On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 11:06:55AM -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 10:52 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:> Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
> >
> > http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
> 
>   Why do we have different forum systems with different login
> requirements for different Arch issues? Seem like KISS would dictate
> - 1 system and 1 login for all forum issues...
> 
>   Is there some logic that tells us which issues should go to the
> regular forum and which go to the ARM forum?
> 
> -- 
> David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
> 

Because Archlinuxarm is unsupported by Archlinux. it is a seperate
project.  The same reason archbang, chakra, bridgelinux, and
archlinux-ppc are seperate as well.



pgp99Yy66myi8.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 9 July 2012 17:06, David C. Rankin  wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 10:52 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:> Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
>>
>> http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467
>
>  Why do we have different forum systems with different login requirements
> for different Arch issues?

No idea. I don't like it either.

> Is there some logic that tells us which issues should go to the regular
> forum and which go to the ARM forum?

I can't see any logic. I don't like the fragmentation.
It's counter-effective and has nothing to do with freedom :)

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

[arch-general] Why Multiple Forums for different issues? Arch Linux/ARM?

[David C. Rankin]

On 07/09/2012 10:52 AM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:> Check the ArchLinux ARM forum:
>
> http://archlinuxarm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3036&p=18467

  Why do we have different forum systems with different login requirements 
for different Arch issues? Seem like KISS would dictate - 1 system and 1 login 
for all forum issues...


  Is there some logic that tells us which issues should go to the regular 
forum and which go to the ARM forum?


--
David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.