Re: New website: Logos

[Graham Percival]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 10:30:29AM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> So, instead, we can say that, *if* anyone should complain
> 
>   - it strikes us that these legalese are in place to prevent
>     misuse/slander etc, and *not* to slow down other free software
>     projects, or hinder other free software (*your*) users?

That applies to Linux projects, and probably *BSD projects
(although some participants in those love to slander GPL projects,
*cough* like my brother *cough* :).

It may or may not apply to Apple; I think it depends on which day
of the week it is.  It definitely doesn't apply to Microsoft.
(although thanks to the GNU FDL'd non-logo, this is no longer a
concern)

>   - we still feel that the way we use all logos, is a helpful,
>     respectful and most probably the best possible way we can
>     do it.
>   - what would help us, is if *you* had some page up, not with
>     what we cannot do, but rather with helpful examples of what
>     we *can* do.  please point us to the logo you want us to
>     use and we'll replace it asap, thanks!

*sigh*

ok, I'll dump the logos from the old download page into the new
Unix page.

> > > I still think having all distro's linux logos has a nice warm
> > > fuzzy look.
> > 
> > Oh mao no.  Then we'd need *another* set of legalese, look up all
> > the licenses on the individual distros, etc.
> 
> I say, don't get your panties all in a knot.

Since my contributions are directly proportional to my amount of
panty-knottedness, shouldn't you deliberately knot them?  ;)
(seriously, "immense irritation" is the most motivating factor for
me working on lilypond)

Cheers,
- Graham