a fedora.next marketing question
rsuehle at redhat.com
Wed Feb 12 22:55:24 UTC 2014
> * "High bar, need to show a distinct problem space". The three initial
> 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 some notes:
- 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.
More information about the marketing