On Sunday 09 July 2006 01:05, Tejas Dinkar <tejasdinkar(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: At present, there are some limited pages under the Artwork section, but the wiki isn't particularly suited for this sort of thing. There has been talk about, and even a little work on, a gallery solution that would hold all sorts of artwork for Fedora. If you're really curious, you can talk on the fedora-art-list or fedora-websites-list mailing lists. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Artwork -- Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes nman64(a)n-man.com http://www.n-man.com/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64 Have I been helpful? Rate my assistance! http://rate.affero.net/nman64/ --

Hey all, Wow, those are REALLY well done, kudos! The most I've done is edited the default FC5 wallpaper to look nice on 2048x768 (dual monitors) and haven't really put it up anywhere. I do think that they should be put into extras, I find the wallpapers are lacking (especially for multi-monitor), and what she has done is simply beautiful. Hopefully we can get a nice collection put up somewhere (even someones homepage for now, I'm willing to host them in the interim). As a side note, I just want to apologize for not being around much the past few weeks, the work leading up to, and after CarolinaCon have been quite hectic for me, and I've been plagued with family issues. I will be around a lot more now, doing as much as I can. -- Surreptitiously Yours, CyberSpy www.cyberspy.ws

Le dimanche 09 juillet 2006 à 12:24 +0100, Dimitris Glezos a écrit : +1 better to concentrate on getting such stuff in extras than on wikis few people will read -- Nicolas Mailhot

Warning - IANAL, and can't offer legal advice, etc. etc., these are just my thoughts: Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: FWIW I really think Creative Commons' Attribution ShareAlike license [1] is the most compatible artwork license for the ideals of Fedora. I really don't like the idea of having NoDerivs applied to Fedora artwork as that seems to render it 'closed source' in a way. If other artists would like to take NoDeriv-licensed wallpapers, 'remix' them, and make them available, they cannot under the provisions of that license. The rationale for the NoDerivs clause on any artwork that uses the Fedora logo makes no sense to me. We're not licensing our code 'NoDerivs,' why would we want to license our artwork NoDerivs? It doesn't protect the logo - it protects everything in the image but the Fedora logo, case in point: (1) If I wanted to take a nice wallpaper but modify it so it was say a Debian wallpaper rather than a Fedora one, it seems I could not because of the NoDerivs clause. If I took the wallpaper with the Fedora logo on a golf ball, for example, gimped out the Fedora logo and put in a Debian logo, that would be creating a derivative of that wallpaper thus violating the license. (2) If I wanted to make a new wallpaper with the Fedora logo, I most certainly could and people have - Diana has a whole website full of them. So the NoDerivs clause does not seem to protect the logo at least in practice. AFAIK, we are also looking to use Attribution ShareAlike for the new icons the Fedora Art team is working on [2] (please correct me if I'm wrong, Diana) The advantage of the CC licenses over the GPL (the GPL was used for the Bluecurve icon artwork) is that the CC licenses are written specifically to address media content, and the Attribution ShareAlike license is really the closest of the CC licenses in spirit to the GPL. I understand that the logo licensing issue is complicated and hairy, but I think having artwork with a NoDerivs license just makes the situation worse. It seems to me that the presence of the logo in a piece of artwork suggests a more open license; otherwise the artist in question is taking the logo as it was their own IP and their right to license its usage which it is not. Wouldn't allowing people to do such jeopardize the trademark? This all seems to be a sore topic though. How do we discuss this and move forward with a solid policy? I think this is a very important step for the Fedora Art team to grow. ~m [1] http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ [2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Artwork/BluecurveAndBeyond

Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Disagree. What if I also want *my* wallpapers as a package in Extras? What if a ton of other people want the same? Where it stops? I think a package in Extras should include a limited number of *selected* wallpapers with the rest hosted in an online gallery, which gallery should be part of Fedora Art, with a very low barrier to entry for new contributors. -- nicu Cool Fedora wallpapers: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/wallpapers/ Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org my Fedora stuff: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro

On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 10:16 +0300, Nicu Buculei wrote: What makes the cut? I'm not trying to be stupid here but having someone dictate what kind of wallpaper is allowed or not provided, it meets the extras requirement, should be allowed. I agree with you that somebodies wallpapers are not my taste. However, it might be someone else's taste. I personally don't like censorship in some cases. Obviously pornography and the like if thats allowed in warnings should be displayed but if not I understand completely. Barring extreme cases I would welcome more wallpapers in some way. Naming conventions will be a bit wierd but diversity is what we are after I would have thought. Just my $0.02 Regards, Marc

Marc Wiriadisastra wrote: I was not trying to argue for censorship, I am very vocal about it (you can find online references of me arguing *for* legit uses of the nazi flag or nudity), I was arguing for quality and diversity over quantity. Have a look at http://www.fedoraforum.org/gallery/browseimages.php?c=2 Would you want a package with all those images? How about instead a collection with 100 or 50 of the images with the largest user ratings? For me the ideal scenario would be the old idea of Background Channels http://www.gnome.org/~clarkbw/blog/GNOME/background_channels with some channels provided by a hypotetic art.fedoraproject.org website -- nicu Cool Fedora wallpapers: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro/wallpapers/ Open Clip Art Library: http://www.openclipart.org my Fedora stuff: http://fedora.nicubunu.ro

On Monday 10 July 2006 05:06, Nicu Buculei <nicu_fedora(a)nicubunu.ro&gt; wrote: This is actually already planned. Originally, we were going to tackle developing a gallery solution loosely based upon GNOME's gallery, but that seems to have fizzled out in favor of finding an existing solution. Right now, we're basically waiting on some of the other Plone-related issues to be solved, after which we'll look at using Plone, possibly with extensions, to provide the gallery solution. Failing that, we'll be looking at all available options, with preference on galleries coded in Python and that could integrate with some of the other technologies used by the Fedora Project. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Websites/Schedule -- Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes nman64(a)n-man.com http://www.n-man.com/ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64 Have I been helpful? Rate my assistance! http://rate.affero.net/nman64/ --