[CentOS-devel] Branding hunt

Digimer lists at alteeve.ca
Tue Jun 3 01:51:12 UTC 2014


On 02/06/14 09:08 PM, Digimer wrote:
> On 02/06/14 08:04 PM, Manuel Wolfshant wrote:
>> On 06/03/2014 02:47 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/02/2014 05:22 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>>>
>>>> 3) To remove ambiguity downstream as to where and what the code
>>>> represents. This includes replacing strings that brand a component to be
>>>> a part of RHEL. eg: if something says 'the xxxx for Red Hat Enterprise
>>>> Linux' we would replace that to say 'the xxxx for CentOS Linux'
>>>>
>>>> Some notes to keep in mind while you go through stuff to check for
>>>> branding issues :
>>>> a) we are not trying to replace (c) Red Hat, or things where it says its
>>>> Red Hat influenced, like the 'gcc -v' string
>>>
>>> With these in mind, do we care about virt-manager, where it lists RHEL
>>> as a default install option? Should we amend that to be RHEL/CentOS, or
>>> leave it as-is?
>>>
>>> </devil's advocate>
>> it depends on how much fate you have in the users. I've seen someone
>> asking once in #centos what option to use for virt-install since he only
>> had "rhel", "fedora" .....
>
> You can't make things idiot proof... I would suggest that confusion was
> a good chance for providing insight to the user on the nature of RHEL
> vs. CentOS. I think it's find to not specifically name CentOS, personally.
>

s/find/fine/

-- 
Digimer
Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without 
access to education?



More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list