Fedoracommunity.org index page

Thu Sep 10 19:15:47 UTC 2009

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:37 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 12:58:58AM -0400, Mel Chua wrote:
> > I'm going to try to chime in from a Marketing standpoint as best I can,
> > and am Ccing the Marketing list in the hopes that Those Who Know More
> > Than I can speak about branding here.
> >
> > To summarize the conversation to date, both to catch up newcomers tothe
> > conversation and to try and form a better understanding of this for
> > myself: we have a naming collision problem. (The thread is at
> >
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-websites-list/2009-September/msg00010.html
> ,
> > please correct me if I've missed/mis-stated anything.)
> >
> > The term "Fedora Community" currently refers to three things.
> >
> > 1. The community of contributors working on the Fedora Project (in other
> > words, "us").
> >
> > 2. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/community/, a site that helps keep
> > track of who is packaging what, and what state those packages are in.
> >
> > 3. http://fedoracommunity.org, the top-level domain for a few (only 2 so
> > far, it sounds like) local group homepages (such as
> > http://ph.fedoracommunity.org/ for the Philippines).
> > http://fedoracommunity.org itself is not up and running, but was
> > supposed to be a directory for all such homepages.
> >
> > Needless, to say, this is confusing, particularly in the case of the two
> > websites. What should we do? Should one or both of the websites be
> > renamed/rebranded? If so, which one(s), and what to? How can we adjust?
> >
> > Some solutions proposed on the list so far:
> >
> >>>> One way we could solve this would be to simply include the page
> >>>> listing at the Fedora Community portal site somewhere, as static
> >>>> content.  Ugh.
> >
> >>>> Renaming fedoracommunity.org is very ugly because people have been
> >>>> accumulating subdomains there for months.  Plus, the domain name was
> >>>> blessed by Legal last year (when we were still talking about
> >>>> "MyFedora") because the domain name helps make it clear that we don't
> >>>> own the site, and aren't responsible for content.
> >
> >>> So it seems the only choice is to rename Fedora Community. I have no
> idea
> >>> what it could be renamed to. Right now it's focused on package
> maintainers
> >>> but we're hoping to expand it out more...
> >
> >> developers.fedoracommunity.org ?
> >> makeit.fedoracommunity.org?
> >> I think it would be a branch from the overall fedora community.
> >
> > My thoughts at this point are mainly questions - some of which have
> > partially been answered in the discussion above.
> >
> > 0. What is the purpose of each website being discussed? (#2,
> > admin.fedoraproject.org/community and #3, fedoracommunity.org)
>
> #2 - the portal project using the Moksha framework for roughtly
>  real-time, interactive collaboration between contributors; right now
>  it serves mainly packagers but the plan is to drastically increase
>  its coverage beyond that group
>
> #3 - a domain used to provide subdomains for local communities at
>  which localized (translated) original content, forums, etc. are
>  provided and maintained outside the Fedora Project; offers both
>  appeal from the perspective of native language, and the ability to
>  discuss and provide solutions outside Fedora's mission and scope
>
> > 1. For each of the websites being discussed, what were the historical
> > reasons for choosing that name? (Pointers to wiki pages, list archives,
> > or IRC logs would be great.)
>
> [[Local_community_domains]] is probably the most important from the
> perspective of the fedoracommunity.org domain (#3).
>
> > 2. For each of the websites being discussed , what would the cost of
> > renaming it be? (What effort would we have to go through, and how many
> > people would be affected, in what way?)
>
> If #3 is only being used by two groups thus far, and if neither has
> spent considerable money producing literature or publicity, renaming
> that one is probably the better option.
>
> If we really want to know "how did this happen?", my feeling is that
> I'm the person at fault here.  I recall being not bowled over by the
> naming of the portal project (#2) to Fedora Community, but I couldn't
> think of why, and I simply failed to put 2 and 2 together with the
> fedoracommunity.org domain name.  I would say that there wasn't enough
> interplay between the FAB list and Infrastructure, where #3 was
> discussed and implemented, and Marketing/Moksha, where #2 was going
> through that process.  And putting those pieces together really is an
> FPL responsibility.  We have the Logistics list now to coordinate such
> things, but didn't back in the winter when #3 was happening (and
> probably #2 too).
>
> Having said that, I'd propose that we get in touch with the groups
> using the fedoracommunity.org domain (#3) to find out to what extent a
> renaming would hamper their community efforts.  I'd like to do that
> with a Cc: of an appropriate list -- Marketing?  Websites?  Logistics?
> Other?
>

I believe all of the other Filipino Fedora Ambassadors will agree on me on
this - we're agreeable to anything the Board deems fit for our local
community domain. This is basically just echoing what Engels posted to the
Board's list a while back [1].

[1]
http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-advisory-board/256150-community-domain-request.html

>
> --
> Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
>  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
>  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
>  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
>
> --
> Fedora-marketing-list mailing list
> Fedora-marketing-list at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-marketing-list
>

-- 
Heherson Pagcaliwagan
http://project.azneita.org
+63.908.885.5428
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-websites-list/attachments/20090911/f03f69b2/attachment.htm>