cloudstack-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Musayev, Ilya" <>
Subject RE: [VOTE] List CloudStack related books on the website
Date Tue, 28 May 2013 22:23:06 GMT
Just food for thought about ACS and profiteering, why don't we let anyone else advertise on
ACS site or throw in their products and services?  In example, we don't mention Citrix CloudPlatform
as the commercial offering for ACS, or another company that provides support and consultancy
services - while those companies contribute heavily.

While the book is certainly helpful, one must be fair to all players on the market, bending
the rules for one VS another - is less than ideal.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers []
> Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 1:07 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] List CloudStack related books on the website
> On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 04:56:46PM +0000, Musayev, Ilya wrote:
> > PS:  I do see an overwhelming benefit of the book to educate new ACS
> users, and benefits at this moment  may outweighs the negatives I've
> mentioned. I can lower my vote to "0", but I would strongly suggest we
> revise this in the near future as more books come on board and we just
> blindly promote books and let others profiteer from ACS efforts.
> >
> The ASF is specifically structured to support commercial use of it's work.
> The license is designed to be commercially friendly on purpose.
> Most of us are using the software within a commercial setting (a distribution,
> a cloud provider (internal or external), consulting services, etc...).  Commerce
> is a good thing.
> As for the vote:
> I've been thinking more about this issue over the weekend.  There are 2
> considerations for me:
> 1) As a project, we want to continue to grow and diversify both users
> and contributors.
> Showcasing work in the ecosystem (books, software that integrated into
> ACS, etc...) helps with that goal.
> 2) As a project within the ASF, we want to ensure that our project
> remains an open and equal environment.
> There is ASF precedent to go either way with this, so there are no
> issues procedurally or at the foundation level for us to be concerned
> with really (beyond the overarching goal to remain open to all).
> I'm +1 on adding this to the site.
> -chip

View raw message