incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Jumper <mike.jum...@guac-dev.org>
Subject Re: Notes on branding
Date Sat, 02 Jul 2016 01:12:40 GMT
On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 3:44 PM, Gunnar Tapper <tapper.gunnar@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Let me offer up a concrete example since I struggle with the issue of
> branding: http://trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html
>
> I chose the following approach based on input from out mentor Stack:
>
> - Added (incubator) to the menu bar
> - Added the incubator logo on the top of the page
> - Placed the disclaimer on the bottom of the page
>
> I did you placeholders in the documentation for things like mailing list,
> project names, and cross-documentation links to make renaming a matter of
> updating pom.xml files and rebuilding.
>
> However, I did NOT put incubator disclaimers or even an incubator status in
> the documentation simply because it felt like over communication of
> incubator status. As you'll see, the Apache license language is included in
> PDF and web-book formats but not the incubator disclaimer. I don't know
> whether I made the right choice. If I didn't, then I'd think that the
> guidance should state that web pages and documentation should include BOTH
> the ASL text and the incubator-disclaimer text.
>
> I hope this helps with the discussion.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Mike Jumper <mike.jumper@guac-dev.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Marvin Humphrey <marvin@rectangular.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Greg Chase <greg@gregchase.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The branding guidelines do not address feedback such as "logo in
> > footer"
> > > or
> > > > "disclaimer is buried deep or below the fold".
> > >
> > > Incubation disclaimers are intended to be substantive.  They are not
> CYA
> > > legal
> > > boilerplate that can be are buried in fine print. The intent is to
> > > communicate
> > > (effectively!) to consumers that a project is incubating. That way,
> > people
> > > will know that certain caveats apply:
> > >
> > >     Apache Foo is an effort undergoing incubation at The Apache
> Software
> > >     Foundation (ASF), sponsored by the Apache Incubator.  Incubation is
> > >     required of all newly accepted projects until a further review
> > > indicates
> > >     that the infrastructure, communications, and decision making
> process
> > > have
> > >     stabilized in a manner consistent with other successful ASF
> projects.
> > >     While incubation status is not necessarily a reflection of the
> > >     completeness or stability of the code, it does indicate that the
> > > project
> > >     has yet to be fully endorsed by the ASF.
> > >
> > > What would be best is if podlings just understood that intent, and as
> and
> > > took
> > > it upon themselves to ensure that their incubating status was
> > communicated
> > > effectively -- in websites, in release announcements, etc.
> > >
> > >
> > Can you cite, as an example, an incubating project's website where you
> > would consider the incubating status effectively communicated, and the
> > disclaimer not buried?
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Gunnar
> *If you think you can you can, if you think you can't you're right.*
>

John and/or Roman, can you comment specifically on how the results of the
branding audit [1] should be interpreted by the podlings concerned, and
(please) provide some concrete examples of what podlings should and
shouldn't do with respect to the audit?

Where is the threshold between "Present, in footer, smaller font" and the
much more colorful "Buried in footer"? Are not footers generally expected
to be in a smaller font?

Given that it sounds like the footer is generally-accepted sensible place
for the disclaimer [2], and that the branding guidelines do not currently
strictly require the Incubator logo [3], I'm not sure what the audit is
trying to say at this point.

If the consensus is that the guidelines need to change, why is an audit
occurring before the actual establishment of said guidelines? If the
guidelines are not changing, why is an audit occurring which applies
undocumented criteria?

Thanks,

- Mike

[1] https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/BrandingAuditJune2016
[2]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/acf796a286ed8202185b2a3b3509389630f5c833982e7b857ce3ab12@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
[3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html#logos

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message