Mailing-List: contact marketing-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: marketing@couchdb.apache.org
From: Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
 boundary="Apple-Mail=_601D4446-728F-4366-B6BA-40A81C8945C5";
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Message-Id: <DBF562F3-8512-4DE6-A468-7568E7803ED4@apache.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: Linking to Professional Services
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:10:41 +0200
References: <47864968-7395-47A5-A36F-CED61CBD2906@apache.org>
 <CAHdjipK9WLow6yUJ3+fKYSR9mTRzAZY+MiCQVDtgxFnA6QYdsg@mail.gmail.com>
 <71B62039-0F5C-4133-A27E-3EA23F3E53E8@apache.org>
 <CADA9kr8Dxx+cppj0KUHP6_Qx6Ktt1gBNqHV4tTtybzRKbpAMSQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: marketing@couchdb.apache.org,
 andywenk@apache.org
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADA9kr8Dxx+cppj0KUHP6_Qx6Ktt1gBNqHV4tTtybzRKbpAMSQ@mail.gmail.com>

--Apple-Mail=_601D4446-728F-4366-B6BA-40A81C8945C5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=windows-1252


On 15 Oct 2014, at 14:34 , Andy Wenk <andywenk@apache.org> wrote:

> Hi Jan,
>=20
> I personally think it's a good idea. The questions you raised are the =
ones
> we have to answer. My comments inline.
>=20
> On 15 October 2014 13:38, Jan Lehnardt <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>=20
>>=20
>>>> Heya Marketingers,
>>>>=20
>>>> 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.
>>>>=20
>>>> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and =
that
>> commercial services are being catered to.
>>>>=20
>>>> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where
>> that=92s not an option.
>>>>=20
>>>> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that =
offer
>> services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
>>>>=20
>>>> I think it=92d 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.
>>>>=20
>>>> Say we all agree that it=92s a good idea*, there are a few open =
questions:
>>>> - who decides which offerings get listed?
>>=20
>=20
> if we restrict it - I think it should be reviewed / tested by a group =
of
> people (review team?) and approve in consensus.
>=20
>=20
>>>> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
>>=20
>=20
> if the before mentioned group has objections concerning:
>=20
> * 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
>=20
>=20
>>>> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after =
all?
>>=20
>=20
> 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.
>=20
>=20
>>>> - how can we avoid a =93first come first serve=94 rush to offer =
something
>> first?
>>>> - etc.
>>=20
>=20
> 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=92t clearly expressed. I meant that we should list =
all of them, but who get=92s to be on top of the list? (simple list =
randomisation per request would do, I just wanted to bring this up here =
:)

Jan
--


>=20
> So the list above does maybe miss one point:
>=20
> - who is going to test the service?
>=20
>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> *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 :)
>>=20
>=20
> +1
>=20
>=20
>>>>=20
>>>>=20
>>>> *- If we don=92t agree that=92s a good idea, that=92s also fine, I =
just
>> wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
>>>>=20
>>>> What do you think?
>>=20
>=20
> Basically a very great idea imho.
>=20
> Cheers
>=20
> Andy
>=20
> --=20
> Andy Wenk
> Hamburg - Germany
> RockIt!
>=20
> GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588
>=20
> https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc


--Apple-Mail=_601D4446-728F-4366-B6BA-40A81C8945C5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=4qFw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_601D4446-728F-4366-B6BA-40A81C8945C5--