cloudstack-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Packt Book - Publish on our website?
Date Fri, 24 May 2013 09:47:09 GMT
(FWIW, I wont stand in the way of this. I'm happy to cast a -0 vote on the
website proposal.)


On 24 May 2013 10:44, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:

> Kelcey, I think that's a false dichotomy. This isn't about marketing /
> coder perspectives. :)
>
> We have two options, as I understand it:
>
> 1) Create a page on our official website and list "recommended" or
> "approved" books. This will almost certainly give the impression (rightly
> or wrongly) that these books have been reviewed and are endorsed by the
> project. Doing this will allow us to filter the books, and make sure only
> the best resources are being promoted. But it also introduces an approval
> process and review bottle-neck, as well as potentially shutting out some
> members of the community, opening up to accusations of in-group
> favouritism[1]. (In fact, this has already raised its head in the form of
> "let's only accept books written by committers".)
>
> 2) Create a page on our wiki, and link to it from our website
> (prominently, if need be). Because this is community editable (i.e. not
> behind a commit bit wall) it should be obvious that this is a community
> resource, and hence, caveat emptor. Our approval system is reduced to lazy
> consensus (i.e. we monitor the wiki changes and revert anything we don't
> like). The wiki might not look as good as the site, but if we promote it
> heavily from the site, there shouldn't be too much difference.
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism
>
>
> On 24 May 2013 10:23, kelcey@backbonetechnology.com <
> kelcey@backbonetechnology.com> wrote:
>
>> Sebastien,
>>
>> I completely agree, and that's why many on the marketing channel often
>> have friction with core developers. The corporate side of me says plaster
>> it everywhere, free advertisement, co-op marketing efforts, put CloudStack
>> in everyones hands...
>>
>> But I have tried over the last year to learn why this and other OSS
>> communities don't like to operate in that way.
>>
>> I now have a moral dilemma... Should I try and work with others to bend
>> the community into a more sales/product ecosystem driven approach, or
>> temper myself to the dev-centric code-first OSS neutrality mentality.
>>
>> I honestly am starting to feel that is this were a vote I would vote +0,
>> even though I put months of my time into this book, lol.
>>
>> I am going to shift my position back to observation on this thread.
>>
>> Sent from my HTC
>>
>> ----- Reply message -----
>> From: "Sebastien Goasguen" <runseb@gmail.com>
>> To: <marketing@cloudstack.apache.org>
>> Subject: Packt Book - Publish on our website?
>> Date: Fri, May 24, 2013 1:20 AM
>>
>> On May 23, 2013, at 2:28 PM, Kelcey Jamison Damage <kelcey@bbits.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Fair enough, I was hoping to get a sense for those that are opposed to
>> the summary, and the reason why.
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Noah Slater" <nslater@apache.org>
>> > To: marketing@cloudstack.apache.org
>> > Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:27:39 AM
>> > Subject: Re: Packt Book - Publish on our website?
>> >
>> > I don't think we have consensus on this.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 23 May 2013 19:25, Kelcey Jamison Damage <kelcey@bbits.ca> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ok,
>> >>
>> >> To summarize it looks like we all want to have 3rd party resources
>> >> available, we want to ensure the content of those resources reflects
>> >> properly on the project, and the wiki sounds like the best way to do
>> it and
>> >> stay neutral.
>> >>
>> >> Does every one agree with this so far?
>> >>
>>
>> I don't think the wiki is the best place. It's a great thing to have
>> books about CloudStack and we should feature them prominently.
>> We could mention on the website something like: "Listing these books does
>> not mean that the Apache project endorses them"
>>
>> FWIW, I feel the same about the case studies, the wiki is not the best
>> place for them.
>>
>> However, if you all feel the wiki is the best place, I won't fight it.
>>
>> -Sebastien
>>
>>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Noah Slater" <nslater@apache.org>
>> >> To: marketing@cloudstack.apache.org
>> >> Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 11:21:31 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: Packt Book - Publish on our website?
>> >>
>> >> If things are done on the wiki, it would be clear that this is a
>> community
>> >> resource, and not an official project recommendation. We always have
>> the
>> >> option of removing something that is obviously spammy, or low-quality,
>> etc.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 23 May 2013 18:48, Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> On May 23, 2013, at 1:38 PM, Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org>
wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Book review is very costly. Several days, to weeks, depending how
>> >>> thorough
>> >>>> you are, and how much free time you have, etc. Do we really want
to
>> >>>> introduce this sort of bottleneck?
>> >>>
>> >>> When I commented earlier I was not thinking of putting any hard
>> barriers
>> >>> like committer status.
>> >>>
>> >>> I was merely thinking about books that can be written in couple days,
>> >> with
>> >>> very poor english, terrible formatting and that could be out of scope
>> >>> despite a "cloudstack" title. We don't want those books listed
>> anywhere.
>> >>>
>> >>> A blanket approval for listing books is not a good idea, we need a
>> >> minimal
>> >>> sanity check.
>> >>>
>> >>> -sebastien
>> >>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 23 May 2013 16:27, Musayev, Ilya <imusayev@webmd.net> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Perhaps we can revisit the thought of  making it commiter written
VS
>> >>>>> comitters reviewed.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> As error safeguard measure it would make sense if have at least
3
>> >>>>> commiters review the publication.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Reason being, while many of us are comitters, some of us maybe
more
>> >>>>> competent in some areas of ACS and less on the other. Therefore
if
>> we
>> >>> have
>> >>>>> several comitters review the publication, we minimize the error
>> >>> posibilty.
>> >>>>> if i was to make an example, i've spent alot of time building
>> private
>> >>>>> clouds that would suit traditional enterprises, i may not be
an
>> expert
>> >>> on
>> >>>>> designing web hosting shops (just yet).
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Obviously exclusions apply, if someone have spent many years
as a
>> core
>> >>> ACS
>> >>>>> architect and developer - he may not need several commiters
to
>> review
>> >>> the
>> >>>>> publication -  though it would not hurt.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The commiters who will be reviewing publication must notify
the
>> >>> community
>> >>>>> via mailing list. If there are points of uncertainty,  the should
be
>> >>>>> brought on ML as well.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> -------- Original message --------
>> >>>>> From: Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org>
>> >>>>> Date:
>> >>>>> To: marketing@cloudstack.apache.org
>> >>>>> Subject: Re: Packt Book - Publish on our website?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 23 May 2013 05:05, John Kinsella <jlk@stratosec.co>
wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On May 22, 2013, at 1:30 PM, Joe Brockmeier <jzb@zonker.net>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> Books authored by committers might be a good metric.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I think this is exclusionary. As Kelcey points out, there's
a high
>> >>>>> probability that some of the best books on CloudStack are not
>> written
>> >> by
>> >>>>> committers.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 23 May 2013 07:06, Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Let me put it bluntly. IMHO wiki pages are a death sentence,
nobody
>> >>> will
>> >>>>>> find that information.
>> >>>>>> If it's not featured on the website then there is no point
talking
>> >>> about
>> >>>>>> it.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Blunt, but hyperbolic. ;) If you really feel so strongly about
the
>> >> wiki,
>> >>>>> you should propose that we shut it down. ;)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> The wiki is a community resource, and we should embrace that,
and
>> >>> encourage
>> >>>>> that.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If you're concerned that people visiting the main website will
not
>> >>> notice,
>> >>>>> and will never find, a page that lists third-party resources,
then I
>> >>>>> suggest a patch that provides a link in the nav saying "third-party
>> >>>>> resources" and link it to the wiki.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> NS
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> NS
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> NS
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > NS
>>
>
>
>
> --
> NS
>



-- 
NS

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message