[CentOS-devel] The Branding Hunt. Ed. 7

See comments at the end...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: centos-devel-bounces at centos.org [mailto:centos-devel-
> bounces at centos.org] On Behalf Of Johnny Hughes
> Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2014 9:30 AM
> To: centos-devel at centos.org
> Subject: Re: [CentOS-devel] The Branding Hunt. Ed. 7
> 
> On 05/14/2014 03:29 PM, Kay Williams wrote:
> > Is there information somewhere on what has been done in the past,
> what
> > worked well, what didn't, etc?
> >
> > Would be nice if changes could be centralized in some way so that
> > folks wanting to make custom branded distros based on CentOS could
> leverage.
> 
> Well, the goal is to change the minimal amount of things possible to
> meet both the requirements to redistribute the software (from the Red
> Hat trademark perspective) ... and also to meet the intent of the
> requirement.
> 
> Here is the document:
> 
> http://www.redhat.com/f/pdf/corp/RH-3573_284204_TM_Gd.pdf
> 
> Specifically we are looking at page 5 under the heading, "Publishing
> and Marketing Red Hat Linux or Red Hat Enterprise Linux Software That
> Has Been Modified"
> 
> The exact rules are that "RedHat-Logos" and "Anaconda-Images" need to
> be changed.  I have done this in a new centos-logos package that will
> be provided for review on git.centos.org.  With that we meet the actual
> requirement of the PDF.
> 
> But the intent is also that if something claims to be Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux, we should change it.  Also, if the logo appears in
> things other than documentation within the distro we should change it.
> 
> For example, if something says to submit a bug report to
> bugzilla.redhat.com, we would want to instead say bugs.centos.org, so
> we want to change this.
> 
> But, if something is there because of copyright or to designate credit
> for work performed then we do not want to change it ... so, as an
> example, the About section of a LibreOffice app says:  "This release
> was supplied by Red Hat, Inc."  That is a true statement and does not
> need to be changed .. if it said "Created for Red Hat Enterprise Linux"
> or something similar, we would change the RPM to take that out.
> 
> The SRPMs that we currently change will either start with the name
> centos, or have a .centos. in the name (the one exception being the
> kernel package .. we change it and we do not change the name so 3rd
> Party drivers supplied for booting the kernel will work with both the
> Red Hat and CentOS kernels.
> 
> We also list the modified SRPMs in our release notes, so for the
> CentOS-6.5 release here is the list:
> 
> http://bit.ly/1ljZd5I
> 
> Thanks,
> Johnny Hughes
> 

Hi Johnny, this all makes sense. 

Is the thinking for centos7, then, to "assign out" chunks of packages to
reviewers/hunters, who when then look at sources for text/logos that should
be changed? 

Would you want the reviewers to sign off for packages reviewed? How many
packages would be typical for a reviewer to handle in a volunteer-friendly
amount of time? How would branding hunting happen on an ongoing basis as new
packages are added?

This could be a pretty huge effort. And a little deflating for reviewers? A
bit like looking for a needle in a haystack. Perhaps some part could be
automated, say an initial pass over sources looking for variants of the text
"Red Hat" in text or file names, and then reviewers could look at just those
packages?

I can definitely contribute some hours to the effort. Just trying to
understand where/how to help and how people's time can be used wisely.

Thanks,
Kay