On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 07:44:59PM +0200, Roland Mas wrote: > Martin Michlmayr - Debian Project Leader, 2003-09-16 17:20:18 +0200 : > [...] > > I would like to ask for comments on this idea. Are people comfortable > > with organizations calling themselves "<foo> Debian Labs" assuming > > that they are doing Debian related work and generally conform to a set > > of guidelines (which are yet to be developed). Also, is there anyone > > interested in helping develop these guidelines? > > I like the idea, but I could understand if people were still a bit > uncomfortable with it. I myself am not quite sure I'd like such a > prominent place for the word "Debian" (but I haven't thought really > deeply about that yet). Just a quick idea for them (us?): these Labs > could be called something like "<foo> D-Labs" (which would call for a > footnote explaining what the D stands for, hence giving us more room > for publicity than just the Debian in the name). Or, equally > straight-from-my-imagination-without-checking-brain, "<foo> Swirl > Factory" or something around these lines. Again, a footnote would be > called for. Yes, but one could drop the "Swirl Factory" or "D-Labs" completely and stick in a footnote saying the project was Debian based and it would be equivalent. The point of the "Debian Labs" model is that highlights the close relationship to Debian in the title in a very explicit way. Regards, Mako -- Benj. Mako Hill mako@debian.org http://mako.yukidoke.org/
Attachment:
pgpCVST96LAUG.pgp
Description: PGP signature