On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > So, Zarafa is getting a lot of press attention: > > http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=6298 > > some of it is fairly unflattering: > > http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3877446/Fedora-13-Beta-The-Seen-and-Troubling-Unseen.htm > > I'm a bit uncomfortable with this myself; the availability of Zarafa in > Fedora seems to be being read in ways in which we certainly didn't > intend it (as an aspect of commercialization, as some kind of Red > Hat-parachuted feature and hence an indication of RH's future > directions, etc). > > I'm wondering if perhaps we should pull Zarafa's mention as a 'feature' > of Fedora 13, or if not that, then certainly develop a more coherent > story about its inclusion, what it's for, why it's in Fedora, and the > whole 'open core' angle on it... > > What do people think? > -- > Adam Williamson > Fedora QA Community Monkey > IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org > http://www.happyassassin.net > > -- > marketing mailing list > marketing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing > First, I don't think we can pull it at this point (Streisand effect and all). Second, this (Zarafa's inclusion in Fedora) is a wonderful success story that I think we should use the opportunity to highlight that a community member (or two) worked to get this feature in the distribution. Even if we have to tell that story as a correction - it's still a powerful one, IMO. -- marketing mailing list marketing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
