[[Marketing_brain_dump]] - if you could add it to the new ideas section, so I can add it and migrate it accordingly into the plan, that would be excellent. :) On 4/20/10, Paul W. Frields <stickster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 02:00:56PM -0700, John Poelstra wrote: >> Adam Williamson said the following on 04/20/2010 09:04 AM Pacific Time: >> > 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? >> >> Disagree. Our feature process does not require a "coherent story for >> inclusion." :) >> >> This feature was added to Fedora through a purely community process by a >> non-Red Hat person (someone correct me if I'm wrong). There was no >> "driving force of Red Hat" behind it that I'm aware of and it should >> remain on the list. >> >> This is not the first time the press has created alternate reality out >> of our feature list. In Fedora 12 the news stories were all about >> Moblin (exceptioned in by FESCo after feature freeze, just like Zarafa, >> by another non-Red Hatter) and how this was Red Hat's attempt to >> "compete head to head with Windows 7 in the netbook space." Considering >> that the owner doesn't work for Red Hat that would have been a little >> difficult :) >> >> To me these stories show that we might need to do a better job >> explaining how our releases processes work and that *anyone* (regardless >> of employer) can submit a feature for inclusion in a Fedora release. >> >> John > > John just provided a great idea for a feature profile for > post-release: profiling how features themselves happen. Is there > currently a list of proposals where we can add that? > > -- > 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/ > Where open source multiplies: http://opensource.com > -- > marketing mailing list > marketing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing > -- Sent from my mobile device -- marketing mailing list marketing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
