www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen McConnell <mcconn...@apache.org>
Subject Re: The Apache Jakarta Law (Scientific?)
Date Wed, 13 Nov 2002 10:23:25 GMT

Andrew C. Oliver wrote:

> Alright, here you go.  Get it out of your systems....
> <flamebait degree="total">
> so I hear 3.3 was a total waste of time and that 4.0 was the best 
> thing ever and that 4.0 is way faster than 3.3.  </flamebait>
> <flamebait degree="total" mode="silly">
> So I hear 4.0 was a big evil conspiricy on the part of Sun via Craig 
> McClanahan who is really a drone for the borg and Scott M is actually 
> the Hive Queen with a holigraphic field around him to make her look 
> human.  I hear 3.3 was the rightous product of REAL apache people.  
> </flamebait>
> Though I could be wrong... 

Actually - I think you *are* wrong. 


Reason is that this really should not be taking about Tomcat (because 
Tomcat is a community, not a product - silly people like me figure that 
out when they download the latest and greatest stable version and 
discover later that Tomcat != product, instead Tomcat == 
directory-of-spec-implementations - umm, let me go back and what version 
I have - a.k.a. product confusion). 

What this discussion should be about is a framework we are obliged to 
live with because this is this "brand" management thing - not a 
discussion on a particular flame.  At the end of the day - getting a 
bunch of committers to get their heads together on brand is a painful 
experience - UNLESS - you provide incentives to maintain a brand.  How 
do you do that?  You create a downside that is sufficiently unattractive 
that people have to work together to sort things out.  The downside of 
forcing re-branding is a significant downside.  Its just like forking - 
but heavier - forking just means that you have to work your but off to 
build the community, but re-branding means investing a lot more time in 
brand recognition and brand loyalty - and loosing a lot more relative to 
what exists in terms of public perception. People actually do think 
about the downsides of possible actions before taking particular 
actions.  These downsides are weighed against the overhead of solving a 
problem though collaboration and other positive good sounding stuff that 
we like to talk about.  So before you tell me off - keep in mind that 
up-sides and downsides provide real people with a sense of perspective.  
Without perspective, well, you just don't get the depth.


Cheers, Steve.


Stephen J. McConnell

digital products for a global economy

View raw message