On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 12:45 +0100, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I was talking recently to a couple of friends who aren't in the software > > industry and it came out in our recent discussions that both the > > companies they are working for is using Fedora on their systems. They > > remarked that they had no idea that Red Hat was involved in Fedora. > > > > I still meet people in various places who think Red Hat has stopped > > working on a free distribution after Red Hat Linux 9 and continue to use > > it or worse a earlier version. > > > > People don't know about Linux. People don't know (or don't care) about > Free and Open Source Software in general. Or open document standards for > that matter. Even more people do not know EPEL. I've seen experienced > administrators not knowing perl-LDAP is actually a package and it > doesn't need to come from CPAN. > > Long story short; people just can't keep track. Some people will miss > out on huge changes. Ask people to explain global warming. Ignorance is > bliss. And not our problem. > > > I just looked within Fedora to see if there was any hint and couldn't > > really find any prominent ones. The note on http://fedoraproject.org is > > also easily missed. Is this a deliberate decision? Should there be some > > of co-branding within the distribution and a prominent hint in other > > places? > > > > Something like Fedora - Powered by Red Hat/ Sponsored by Red Hat or some > > such. > > > > A *huge* -1 here > > We've already spend lots of effort getting rid of the widely spread > prejudice of being Red Hat's pre-enterprise private little playground > project or distribution, and explaining that we're actually a community > powered project instead (Yes, sponsored by Red Hat. Yes, upstream to Red > Hat's Enterprise Linux product *and proud of it, might I add*). > > I'm not even sure we actually did get rid of that prejudice entirely. It > may still exist in some people's heads. > > Anyway, correctly and fully exposing how Fedora is related to Red Hat, > and how that works for both the community and Red Hat, with mere mortals > on the one side, and business customers on the other, is way more > important then getting the long-term users back on board because they > missed out on Red Hat renaming the free/gratis distribution to Fedora, > making Red Hat their Enterprise product. > > Honestly, I don't think it's our problem someone missed out on all this > back in the day. If they're really interested / valuable as > contributors, it'll come naturally. If not, it'll still come naturally > with the work of our Ambassadors and thanks to other exposure. In a thread on fedora-ambassadors-list[1], someone was kind enough to raise an exception from our own Greg DeKoenigsberg: "The Fedora brand must evolve separately from Red Hat's brand. Fedora is very important to Red Hat, but Fedora is not Red Hat. It's really crucial to understand that distinction." -1 to co-branding. = = = = = [1] http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2008-March/msg00187.html -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Fedora-marketing-list mailing list Fedora-marketing-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
