a fedora.next marketing question

Jaroslav Reznik jreznik at redhat.com
Fri Feb 14 09:29:38 UTC 2014

----- Original Message -----
> >  * "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
> >     important.
> > 
> > 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
> > answers?
> 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.

But this leads back to the second "low bar" option - resources. If the new
product would be able to provide resources for other teams (QA, marketing,
rel-eng, websites), then it should be allowed. And I think it's the way for
all products - all products should provide these resources to above 
mentioned groups and these groups would be doing more coordination work
instead of being overloaded by requests from products. 

And actually this low bar option (with resources required) is still going to
be pretty much high bar thing. I'm not sure there are many teams in Fedora
that could do this (I'm not even sure that 3 products currently proposed
have that resources buy-in now but that's different question). I don't 
expect many products coming this way but at least, Fedora would be still
inclusive community (low bar for non products, high bar for products but
based on resources).


> If I had to vote, I'd thus be inclined to lead towards the high bar option.
> Ruth
> --
> marketing mailing list
> marketing at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing

More information about the marketing mailing list