Mailing-List: contact marketing-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: marketing@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of joant@lrtw.org designates
 204.11.51.157 as permitted sender)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 16:41:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org>
Reply-To: Joan Touzet <wohali@apache.org>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Cc: marketing@couchdb.apache.org
Message-ID: <7436006.48.1414442455244.JavaMail.joant@Joans-MacBook-Pro.local>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAJ_m3YD2DubGjZUjB8kZi1RRAceHD+9+T3G6JjqSJvkAw6-01Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Naming releases
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

-0.5 for all the reasons previously outlined.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Davis" <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com>
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org, andywenk@apache.org
Cc: marketing@couchdb.apache.org
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2014 3:39:55 PM
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Naming releases

I'm a bit on the -1 side of things as well. Having two ways to refer
to a release has always annoyed me with projects like Debian/Ubuntu.
Granted they tend to use them a lot more interchangeably than Noah is
suggesting, though I do wonder if it'd still lead to confusion.

I think for the particular current case I wonder if we can't think of
other perk things for the category that Noah is trying to fill. Though
I have to say I can't think of anything off the top of my head.

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Andy Wenk <andywenk@apache.org> wrote:
> I have a bit of a feeling, that the proposal is a bit misunderstood. Noah
> has written:
>
> "We'd mention the name in the release announcement and
> in the changelog. But otherwise, we'd continue to talk about releases
> using the release number."
>
> So we use the name for a CouchDB release solely for marketing activities.
> We stay with the release numbers. So the number is the important part. Wi=
th
> Mac OS X and Ubuntu, the name is the important part and the number is ...=
 a
> number.
>
> So I don't see any problems with naming a release if we keep the release
> number as the most important part.
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
> On 27 October 2014 20:18, Klaus Trainer <klaus_trainer@posteo.de> wrote:
>
>> I agree that it can be confusing.  Ubuntu is doing that, and even though
>> I've been using it for almost a decade now (and thus follow its release
>> cycles pretty closely), I'm still getting confused about their release
>> names from time to time.  Please make sure that our project won't run
>> the risk of creating such unnecessary confusion.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Klaus
>>
>>
>> On 27.10.2014 19:31, Robert Samuel Newson wrote:
>> > Also not a fan, its confusing and there=E2=80=99s an effort involved i=
n coming
>> up with a name, an artificial impediment to release cycles, and we have
>> enough real ones.
>> >
>> > B.
>> >
>> >
>> >> On 27 Oct 2014, at 16:45, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I=E2=80=99m not a fan, but I won=E2=80=99t be in the way of this.
>> >>
>> >> Best
>> >> Jan
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>> On 27 Oct 2014, at 14:49 , Noah Slater <nslater@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi folks,
>> >>>
>> >>> SUMMARY
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm currently working on the rewards for the CouchDB AdvocateHub. (S=
ee
>> >>> bottom of this email for a refresher.)
>> >>>
>> >>> One of the rewards I'd like to offer is the ability to "name" a
>> >>> CouchDB release. We'd mention the name in the release announcement a=
nd
>> >>> in the changelog. But otherwise, we'd continue to talk about release=
s
>> >>> using the release number.
>> >>>
>> >>> Primarily, I see it as a bit of fun. And a great way to reward
>> advocates.
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm cross-posting this to dev and marketing because it's both a
>> >>> release management proposal as well as a marketing proposal.
>> >>>
>> >>> DETAILS
>> >>>
>> >>> The way I see it working:
>> >>>
>> >>> - Advocate redeems the "name a release" reward, and picks a name
>> >>> - The name is vetted by the PMC (for brand protection) and put on a
>> queue
>> >>> - The next release picks the oldest name on the queue
>> >>>
>> >>> I'd probably actually want to separate this into three rewards:
>> >>>
>> >>> - Name a bugfix release
>> >>> - Name a minor release
>> >>> - Name a major release
>> >>>
>> >>> Each one would be require more points than the last.
>> >>>
>> >>> REFRESHER
>> >>>
>> >>> Our AdvocateHub is a professional tool that has been donated to us
>> >>> that will allow us to mobilise fans of CouchDB to talk about, promot=
e,
>> >>> and advocate CouchDB to on social media, and to their network. For a
>> >>> project like ours, with limited to no financial budget for tradition=
al
>> >>> marketing, this is a huge opportunity for us.
>> >>>
>> >>> The AdvocateHub has two important concepts (for the purposes of this
>> >>> email): challenges and rewards. Advocates complete challenges (like
>> >>> "leave a review" or "write a case-study") and in return, we give the=
m
>> >>> points. Collect enough points, and they can redeem rewards. The
>> >>> rewards are a thank you helping to advocate CouchDB.
>> >>>
>> >>> RATIONALE
>> >>>
>> >>> There are four main categories of reward:
>> >>>
>> >>> - Stuff (t-shirts, mugs, tickets to conferences, etc)
>> >>> - Access (dinner with a committer, promotion on our blog, social
>> media, etc)
>> >>> - Status (recognition on our website, hand written thank you note, e=
tc)
>> >>> - Power (name a release, ... what else?)
>> >>>
>> >>> Struggling on the "power" category, because everything we do here is
>> >>> decided by the community. This category would be much easier to fill
>> >>> out if we were a regular business. But I figure that naming a releas=
e
>> >>> is a fun approach.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Noah Slater
>> >>> https://twitter.com/nslater
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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