No. It's a suggestion.
Add a Press Kit to the project's website. It helps press correctly reference the project and have proper info about it in one single place, instead of taking a lot of time diving into endless website pages. One place to rule them all, for press.
These are great examples for inspiration:
As I saw @TrechNex mentioning somewhere, some people at press use the "wrong" logo version of the project, they get the inverted one from the website as this is the easier, faster path to get the logo. It soon will be fixed, but serves as an example of the usefulness of a Press Kit page, displaying how to use the project's logo, it's rules, how the project wants to be portrayed, how it's image should be maintained in media. Serious press websites or magazines respect this. It also helps to market the project as it serves as a central point for anyone interested in writing, blogging or vlogging about the project, a primary source of info, images in high quality, logo, high resolution images, etc.
A journalist that has a full day of busy work is not gonna go GitHub hunting for icons and images on the branding sub-repo. They might not even consider that such repo exists. Press is used to Press Kits, it's a standard.
cc @jaames and @BrainBlasted as they're involved with branding and the website
A press kit is definitely a good idea, especially if some people are incorrectly using the inverted version of the logo - that's only going to get more prevalent as the project gains traction.
Redhat's press kit looks really solid, I'd say we model our own kit on that :)
Most helpful comment
A press kit is definitely a good idea, especially if some people are incorrectly using the inverted version of the logo - that's only going to get more prevalent as the project gains traction.
Redhat's press kit looks really solid, I'd say we model our own kit on that :)