[advocacy-discuss] Logo colours ...

[Laurent Blume]

Simon Phipps a écrit :
> While that would be a fun thing to do, I think it would be a mistake  
> right now. Here's why.
> 
> First, the build team for the May release needs some graphics to  
> include in their release. Realistically, they need them in the next  
> week or so. Since we're on a "release train" model, the train isn't  
> going to wait for us to hold a competition, so in practice introducing  
> this delay means asking for a decision to be made without our  
> involvement and invites another confrontation. This is just a  
> pragmatic observation, not a defence of the situation.

This is a good argument, release should not be delayed, but then, maybe
the logo could be postponed, or a tempôrary design chosen.

> Second, designing graphics for this sort of use is actually a skilled  
> task. It involves an awareness of international branding guidelines,  
> of the legal implications of the choices, and of more. Each design  
> then needs to have a legal search carried out on it, and more. We  
> wouldn't ask for the thread scheduler to be designed by a contest;  
> we'd expect it to be a task for the skill of a clever and experienced  
> community contributor. The same should apply to this work.

I would disagree here. Guidelines can be established in advance, and
others have very succesfully done it.
The best recent example I think of is the SpamAssassin logo:

http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/LogoContest
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/LogoDetails

I find the result brilliant, it's catchy, and integrated them into an
existing organization, Apache.

The legal search only has to be carried out on the winner. If it fails
it, then the next contender will be considered. It's not until a new
logo is officially chosen that any legal ties are established. Until
then, they remain the property of their creators.

I'm sure it would be exactly the same process if using a professional
agency, since I doubt they'd run a search on all their drafts.

> That's not to say it should happen in secret; we need transparency for  
> this contribution as we need it for every other. Frankly there is  
> still not enough of that transparency throughout the project, and I  
> think one of the key tasks for the new OGB will be to work  
> constructively but firmly with every part of the existing contributor  
> base to make that transparency happen. Including the people who design  
> the graphics as well as the people who design the thread scheduler.

«Transparency» as in «look, but do not touch»? :-)

> Fun though this idea would be, I believe it invites the actual  
> decision to just be made anyway and I don't think we want to make that  
> happen. I think we need to engage with the designs we have, make  
> constructive comments and suggestions and make sure that the design  
> chosen is the best we can make it in the time available.

Sure, I really agree that the time constraint is important, but IMO,
it's a good reason to delay choosing the logo rather than rush to have a
cheap one made, that will have to stay for a while. What we've seen so
far is nice, but rather bland.

Laurent
-- 
/ Leader de Projet & Communauté    | I'm working, but not speaking for
\ G11N   http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com
/ FOSUG  http://guses.org          |