[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Branding for Debian derivatives

Anthony Towns wrote:
> So, following the discussions at DebConf [0], the "Debian Powered" logo
> ideas [1], and a couple of other chats I've had the privelege of having
> with some folks working on Debian derivatives and Debian-based distros and
> similar things, I'd like us to introduce an official branding programme
> for derivatives -- which I'll count as any providing Debian software to
> other people that's not just an official CD. So that includes things like
> Ubuntu, Knoppix, or Linspire, but potentially also things like Debian-Edu,
> or Debian CGL [2].
> The drawback to just doing that without any further thought, is that
> providing branding gives a derivative not just the opportunity to benefit
> from Debian's reputation of supporting free software, being open and
> community driven, and focussing obsessively on quality, but also to
> potentially sully that reputation by letting users think this is a
> "Debian" product, but not living up to Debian's reputation, whether that
> be by not caring about free software issues, or ignoring their users'
> complaints, or whatever. And that's not just bad for Debian, but for all
> the other derivatives who choose to share in Debian's reputation as well
> as its code.
> So, what I'm thinking is basically a trade, where Debian offers to help
> our derivatives get the benefits of Debian's reputation, and where the
> derivative commits to helping build that reputation, both to its own
> benefit, but also to Debian and other derivatives.
> My best guess at what the latter means is something like this: that derivatives
> should provide a clear, written commitment to their users and the free software
> community that:
>         (a) they'll listen to their users and do their best to incorporate
>             that input in future releases
>         (b) they'll cooperate with the free software community, both
>             in making every effort to make any free software they write
>             easy to include in other products, and in complying with
>             the licenses of the free software they use and distribute

I wonder if it's only me who is missing several pieces:

No link to the Debian Bug Tracking system.

No mention to work together with the Debian maintainer.

No mention to discuss development aspects on Debian mailing lists.

No mention about making incompatible changes that will result in the
derivate becoming incompatible with its root.

No mention to let patches flow back into Debian or the Free Software
community via official means (i.e. BTS, mailing lists).

No mention to not use steganographic means to hide real patches in
loads of changes that affect what the world knows as branding.

No mention that the derivate should (really should, pretty please)
stay to its roots, i.e. Debian and promote Debian.

No mention that the derivate should link to the Debian website (only
vice versa).



Let's call it an accidental feature.  -- Larry Wall

Reply to: