* "High bar, need to show a distinct problem space". The
products are basically all areas we want to cover, and they don't really
overlap. This approach says that for a new primary product to be added,
there should be a new, separate problem space to tackle -- there
shouldn't be internal competition, and users should easily find the
product that matches their needs without going through a "choose your
own adventure!" process.
* "Low bar, need to show viable resources to do the work". The idea here
is that if someone wants to contribute to working on something in
Fedora, and can demonstrate that they can pull it off, we should
promote it. I think this camp recognizes that it makes the web site
more complicated, but judges supporting our contributors to be more
So, marketing team people: what do you think? Which is the right general
approach? If we do the second thing, does it dilute our ability to deliver
the Fedora Message? How can we overcome that? Other questions? Other
From the perspective of marketing things, I'm not sure they're
particularly different. If I understand what you're asking, serving these
"products" doesn't detract from a Fedora message any more than marketing
RHEL prevents the company from having an overall Red Hat message. But I'll just add
- I'm still concerned about the Red Hat point of view on using the word
"products" for Fedora things.
- We are already understaffed, so to speak, as a marketing team. We may be able to sort-of
serve three things, but if we're going to be adding anything that someone "can
pull off," we just won't be equally serving everyone.
If I had to vote, I'd thus be inclined to lead towards the high bar option.