[advocacy-discuss] Re: Logo/Mascot for OpenSolaris

[Eric Boutilier]

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Darren.Reed at Sun.COM wrote:
> Stephen Lau wrote:
>
>> I still maintain that identity and 'creating a mark' are not issues that 
>> should involve the OGB.  The OGB should be about governance, not a generic 
>> leadership board.  These sorts of things are best left to people who are 
>> either interested or best-equipped to drive it: and in our community, that 
>> is the Advocacy Community.
>> 
>> If people still maintain that it should be an OGB decision, then as an OGB 
>> member, I move that we delegate this to the Advocacy Community.  I'm no 
>> expert at figuring out what the best way is to form logos/marks, how long 
>> it takes to do them, create them, or select them.
>
> The model that I envisage of how it should work is:
> - ogb asks advocacy to go and do this
> - advocacy goes and does it, comes back with a result
> - ogb says "thank you" and gives it a stamp of approval.
>
> In other words, the advocacy group does all of the "hard work"
> but it should still need to be ratified by the OGB.

I'm in the other camp. That is, the camp that feels it's best if
Community Group decisions -- even major ones -- do not, by default,
call for OGB ratification. I like, for example, the Project
Insantiation spec which says that although Community Groups must notify
the OGB when they (the CG) has approved a new project, getting OGB
blessing is not required.  Admittely, a prerequisite of this philosophy
is healthy, active, aware, and engaged Community Groups. In this case,
fortunately, that's clearly not an issue.

Eric