Aeneas wrote:@ Webunny:
Why don't you just send out a sample of what you might want to sell? I think it will be then an easy matter to decide, is it "OK" or is it not. Z98 did not sound like he is going to interfere much, but that he does not want to accept uncertainty. And IF you want to do it, you WILL need to have an idea at least of THIS. After all, the looks of the much-compared Ubuntu-CD weren't a big secret, either...
Well, I would say the 'general repetition' with the small amount of Ros-CD's of the 3.14 version IS my sample. If any insurmountable objections arise which I think have a point, I could still adapt things for the 3.15 version, which I plan to print in larger quantity. If negotiations go well with z98 and I can start with it, that is. (On itself, it's pretty weird I have to negotiate still further, since the premise already is that Ros gets all the gains and I take all the risk/losses for the alpha's and beta's). I know z98 seems to put a very high value on the 'brand' of Ros...but really, Ros is relatively unknown, and more importantly; I don't see why the brand would be diluted by making printed CD's of Reactos. A brand does not get diluted by it's own product, one may hope.
To give even a sample OF and BEFORE the 25 CD's of the 3.14 version - I've looked into that myself, actually, because I would like to know how it will pan out beforehand too (it's not an unreasonable wish on itself): it's not really feasible, or at least, wise. If I'm only ordering ONE single CD (as example) with all the things I want (thermal printing, DVD-case, flyer, cover, etc.), it would cost 27,5 euro. For that money, I can as well go straight for the 25 CD's; it's already equal to about 20% of that price.
About the looks itself; that ain't a secret. It's based on bntsers' art, which many, including z98, find really good. That's also why I don't see what the problem is, really. I don't quite get what the 'representing Ros' has to do with it; the quality can't be THAT bad, if it's what bntser has shown and it's thermal printing by a professional printingservice, that people are going to drop Ros for it (certainly not the testers for which these alpha-releases are meant). The only thing I could think of is maybe an explicit warning it's for testing purposes. For the rest; what is the problem, exactly? I can hardly imagine the 'brand' of Ros is going to be taken down the drain by simply making a thermal printed CD with Reactos on it. Why would the manufacturer matter in regard to the fear of "reflecting badly upon the project"? If he's delivering a good product: does it matter? Now, in regard to quality control, I can understand, but once that is ok, it really doesn't matter where in europe or the usa it's printed. Would Ros be ok if it's printed in Poland with service x, but suddenly become 'badly reflecting on Ros' if it's in France with service Y, even if the quality of the disc would be the same? That seems very unlikely to me. And why would the design of bntser reflect badly on the project, when all seem to highly praise it; again, I don't see any possible logical explanation.
But anyway, I've emailed z98, we'll see how it goes.
Edit: z98, about the author saying BSD is 'right', he didn't mean to say BSD is, in general, and in absolute terms 'right' (aka, the right licence for everyone, or for all purposes). this is the context in which he said it: "So who is right? Well, the BSD camp is. The BSD is no doubt a freer license, it gives you the right to decide what rights to bundle with the software." The conclusion that BSD is 'right', thus, pertains to the question of which one is freer, and that BSD is right to claim their licence is more free than that of the GPL. And it's for that that he gives the arguments (and his reasoning seems rather solid). Even if you look at the term 'free' as in 'speech', one can't come to another conclusion that BSD is, in that area, more free, since it let's you do more things with it than the GPL.
So he wasn't saying BSD is 'right' in the sense that it is the 'right' licence, but that BSD-folks are right in the claim that BSD is more free than the GPL.
To counterargument that, one would have to be able to demonstrate that the BSD gives you less, or at least no more freedom, than the GPL, which is difficult to do, since the GPL *DOES* impose more restrictions on you if you want to use it.
So, logically, I think the guy had a point.
Edit2: z98, did you get my email? (Just asking, not that I am expecting emailresponses before you even started the day or that I'll get your answers faster.
)