Re: [PROPOSED] Swap the "open" and "official" versions of the new logo
Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> As I said, I'd love to have Raul's opinion on this. I think the fact that
> the official logo is _simpler_ is pure genius. It's simple, it gets to ge
> point, it's identifiable, it's everything a logo should be. The other one,
> with the bottle, is more like a work of art. I can see why people like it
> better for identifying a product (namely, the distribution, not the
> project), but this is exactly the reason I like the simpler one better as a
> project logo. You can slap this thing (the swirl) on top of something else,
> and voila, you have a logo for some specific product of the project.
Well, I agree with you about that. (One idea I like: center the swirl around
the hole in a CD. I think it'll look rather nice).
However - there's nothing stopping us or anyone from using the open use form
of the logo on an official debian cd!
A cd could be made with the swirl centered on it and covering most of it
like I described above, and then the swirl and bottle writ small in a
corner. Or if whoever was making the CD didn't like the bottle, they could
leave it off. That's all allowed by the logos reprecitve licenses.
--
see shy jo
Reply to: