Open Stack

On 03/12/14 03:58, Anne Gentle wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 9:15 AM, Christian Berendt
> <berendt at b1-systems.de <mailto:berendt at b1-systems.de>> wrote:
> 
>     On 11/28/2014 03:46 PM, Matt Kassawara wrote:
>     > rather straightforward. As for .graffle files in the repo, I would like
>     > to store them somewhere because a lot of people appear to use
>     > OmniGraffle and those files contain metadata that improves efficiency
>     > over SVGs.
> 
>     I think that it is not correct to use proprietary software running on a
>     proprietary operating system generating proprietary source files to
>     create graphics for the OpenStack documentation. There is usable open
>     source software to create graphics (like inkscape) and I think such
>     software should be used and has to be used.
> 
> 
> I know this sentiment runs deep in open source communities. I support
> the spirit but won't enforce in practice other than to ensure open
> formats are in our repo to ensure we're enabling correct licensing of
> the content. 
> 
> For the Ops Guide, we don't use Adobe Illustrator for example, but the
> source from O'Reilly is .ai files. However we don't have those source
> files and have been editing png and svg in the community. I think there
> are similarities here. 
> 
> I think it makes sense to upload CC licensed images to the wiki, as done
> for https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Icons where there are eps, svg, and
> png. 
> I also think that it's not crucial that graffle files or ai files are
> uploaded anywhere.
> 
> Generally we should document our approach to images, and it should
> include a priority towards open source, but a higher priority towards
> licensing than tooling. 
> Just my current thinking, feel free to persuade me for another line.
> Thanks,
> Anne 

Necro-posting here, but what should become of this review, which deletes
all graffle files

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/137783/

?


Regards,


Tom