Enterprise OS for everyone!
Community Strikes Back!
Solid, as always used to be!
4 Likes
Solid as always used to be, Community-driven as always will be.
For logo colors, I think it should keep it green, because is not āredā or āblueā, if you know what I meanā¦
1 Like
Watch out the mountain icon is already used by Alpine Linux! Letās choose a color because we like it not only because nobody used it yet!
1 Like
Hi people. I am new to this and I am here mainly because I started learning about CentOS on Udemy and like it alot. I wonāt bore you with my life-story. I was just going to comment why not use the āmountainā logo- and then i saw what was presented here in this post. I personally like these designs very much!
This looks very appealing to me!
Man! I need to read more! I did not know about Alpine Linux!
What do you think about the name RockOS ?
Feel solid no ? 
As far as the name goes - I do want to bring into this thread that progress has been made to the point where the name is unlikely to be changed anytime soon.
The various teams are focusing heavily on meeting the challenge of getting the project up and running, safe, and getting to a point where there is an OS to build.
(I am absolutely not trying to shut down any conversations here. I just wanted to add here what has happened elsewhere in the project.)
The #rocky-branding channel in Slack is a great place for anyone here who wishes to get in on the action 
1 Like
@hbjy I love this logo. Itās beautiful and elegant and will work in many contexts.
1 Like
Great work. I personally prefer the dark one.
Looks very nice too.
This +1
AAAAAAAAA+++ would use
Is there an official position on branding for the actual OS. Is there a hard rule that states that the OS experience must be rebranded or do we go for the simpler solution and just brand for the website while preserving the package structures. There are advantages and disadvantages to both.
To b(rand), or not to b(rand), that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of anachronistic package management,
Or to take art against a sea of branding packages
And by rereleasing them. To dyeāto rsync,
No more; and by an rsync to say we end
The heart-ache and the dozen rebranded forkings
That distro is heir to: 'tis a consummation of time
Devoutly to be wishād. To dye, to rsync;
To rsync, perchance to anachronizeāay, thereās the rub:
For in that rsync of anachronist branding may come,
When we have shuffled off this exact copy,
Must give us pauseāthereās the respect
That makes non-forking of so long life.
For who would bear the branding and iconography of CentOS,
Thāoppressorās wrong, the IBM manās contumely,
The pangs of disprizād love, the distroās package delay,
The insolence of big blue, and the spurns
That patient merit of thāunworthy community takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare clone? Who would SRPMs bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary builder,
But that the dread of something after CentOS,
The undiscovereād fork-country, from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to other distros that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of distro-bution
Is sicklied oāer with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of linux and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action.
- By rebranding you will need to maintain some packages. In addition to all of the xwindows and cockpit packages, you will needā¦
- grub2
- shim-signed
- httpd
- grubby
- clearos-release (called something else)
The advantage is that you can get recognition as your own distro. And here is the rub, the disadvantage is that many packages and services are aware of the big dogs and provide turn key support for those packages. Itās not only this but you will need to make in-roads with CEPH, driver manufacturers, and a host of others that will NOT work because they donāt recognize your release file and refuse to install.
- The other course is to simply provide an anachronistic mirror of CentOS. So people end up getting CentOS with YOUR mirror system instead of the CentOS one. The advantage is you get all of the compatibility to CentOS but the downside is that your branding is lost in translation. If you do this, your ādistributionā is not really a distribution but rather a Quality of Package Service provider. You would essentially provide a faithful copy of CentOS without the drama of unstable packages. You would release the same packages after they have been qualified enough to meet RHELās standard.
If the latter is the path, Iām here to help with full gusto. If the former, Iāll give you as much insight as I can but will work on standing up the latter in a different project and will give you any pointers where I can.
1 Like
From what I read so far we want our brand to reflect and improve upon what CentOS used to be before RHEL & IBM messed it all up. Our values continue to be the same, but we have the added aspects of rebellion and freedom in that we are committing to the community and not sticking to the script that RHEL & IBM is giving us by obligating us to switch to RHEL.
Story telling is the soul of branding, and I think we should take that in account when thinking about this. Like we have done, I have seen little if not any hate on RHEL for what they have done and lot of work on how to create a Brand that is reflective of our community.
This is why building something new is necessary, because United States of Briton would not have been as effective. But every pebble counts we welcome your insights and points and hope for a day when you can commit fully to the cause.
1 Like
I personally like this logo. Just be aware of the similarities to the Logo of a certain fintech based in SG backed up by y combinator and present in some other countries in South East Asia.
That was a simple google lens search. Whatās the direction to take? Or the legal implications? I donāt know. Maybe a few changes to the Logo.
(Also if you want to remove this post or move it to slack is ok, itās just a heads up)
Check out the Android Q logo, looks similar too and Google can be a pain in the * when it comes to legal issueās.
éåøøäøéēéę©ä»„ļ¼čæå¾ę”å¾å„½ēļ¼ęēÆäæēęč§
The Rocky Mountains works if it is purple (like OP suggested). It conveys what people want in a business system: reliable, large, simple, and will last for years. No one wants a cartoon animal that could climb in the rack start eating the wires or get fried.
As long as the logo has two or three peaks (it looks like two in the picture) we are fine. If it looks like Arch or the Cinnamon DE logo, fine, as long as it is different enough. It has to look good on a t-shirt, and Arch and Debianās logos do that. I did not see the large migrating herd of mystic spirals on my last trip to Yellowstone.