couchdb-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Garren Smith <gar...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Linking to Professional Services
Date Thu, 16 Oct 2014 09:06:18 GMT
I like the idea of linking of professional services. One thing I would like
to see is that people that have committer status or are on the PMC are move
visible. That will encourage other people that want to offer Couchdb
services to contribute to Couchdb to get committer status.

Cheers
Garren

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:

>
> On 15 Oct 2014, at 14:34 , Andy Wenk <andywenk@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > I personally think it's a good idea. The questions you raised are the
> ones
> > we have to answer. My comments inline.
> >
> > On 15 October 2014 13:38, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>>> Heya Marketingers,
> >>>>
> >>>> one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and
> >> companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional
> >> services or support offerings.
> >>>>
> >>>> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and
> that
> >> commercial services are being catered to.
> >>>>
> >>>> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where
> >> that’s not an option.
> >>>>
> >>>> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer
> >> services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website
(or
> >> sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that
> exist
> >> so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if
> needed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open
> questions:
> >>>> - who decides which offerings get listed?
> >>
> >
> > if we restrict it - I think it should be reviewed / tested by a group of
> > people (review team?) and approve in consensus.
> >
> >
> >>>> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
> >>
> >
> > if the before mentioned group has objections concerning:
> >
> > * general quality of the service / product
> > * not following the branding and trademark rules
> > * not clear who the people are behind the service
> > * "black hat" people at the service
> >
> >
> >>>> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after
> all?
> >>
> >
> > that's a hard question. Because of that, I proposed the review team
> above.
> > The service should be tested and granted for good. Maybe we say "after
> our
> > review and at this moment we think this is a good service. But we reserve
> > the right to remove the service at a later point if it comes to our
> > attention, that the service has become bad" or sth. like this. I think
> you
> > get the idea. So this goes a bit in a "CouchDB approved service"
> > certificate or sth. similar.
> >
> >
> >>>> - how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something
> >> first?
> >>>> - etc.
> >>
> >
> > If I understand correctly I would like to ask, why there should be first
> > come first serve at all? If there are more similar services, why not
> adding
> > them all?
>
> Heh, sorry, this wasn’t clearly expressed. I meant that we should list all
> of them, but who get’s to be on top of the list? (simple list randomisation
> per request would do, I just wanted to bring this up here :)
>
> Jan
> --
>
>
> >
> > So the list above does maybe miss one point:
> >
> > - who is going to test the service?
> >
> >
> >>>>
> >>>> *If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache
> >> projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that
> >> answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :)
> >>
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> *- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just
> >> wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you think?
> >>
> >
> > Basically a very great idea imho.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > --
> > Andy Wenk
> > Hamburg - Germany
> > RockIt!
> >
> > GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588
> >
> > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc
>
>

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