Re: Deployments page sends the wrong message
2012/2/9 Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org: On Thu, February 9, 2012 6:57 am, Allan Day wrote: On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org wrote: On Tue, February 7, 2012 3:30 pm, Christy Eller wrote: Hi- I have been gathering some more info about recent deployments. Thanks to Marina, I have added several more current deployments to our Deployments wiki page, https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments, including a one using GNOME 3.0.2. Thanks for working on this, it's great to have some current information there My suggestion is that we split off the older deployments to another page, called GNOME Deployments 2000-2008. I would prefer to have that info available, but I agree with Joanie that seeing a list of really old deployments could send a negative message. I would rename the current page to Current Gnome Deployments, and would refer to the older deployments page there. I chose those dates, because I want to make sure that the current page has enough data not to look too sparse. That sound really great to me. I agree with you and Joanie that it doesn't look good to have such old information on that main deployments page. I'm trying to track down info on another couple of deployments I know of too. What's this page used for? Is it worth the effort of ongoing maintenance? In the most general way, I think it's important to have a place where we show people where GNOME is being used. More specifically, I have wanted to point potential new partners to this page but have hesitated because it's so out of date. It's nice to be able to show folks that GNOME is used successfully in real endeavours. Were the page somewhat current, we could also use it as a reference for grant applications and the like. karen Depending on the efforts that may be put here, I would suggest performing some 'call for contributors', and to try to engage them as deployment-study's maintainers. Just as with the software! As a maintainer, the marketing team would encourage you to keep updated the deployment-study, with annual revisiones, for example. I really think it could succeed providing some deployment-study templates, just for avoiding misleading the newcomer contributors about what kind of document is desired here. Because of my job, I'm in contact with the core-team of two big GNOME deployment on a daily basis: * Guadalinfo: 754 Telecenter network in Andalusia running GNOME 2.28 * Valencia public education's classrooms: Running GNOME 2 on every single primary and secondary classroom If you found this interesting I would offer myself as guinea pig. Regards! -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list -- J. Félix Ontañón Carmona -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Deployments page sends the wrong message
On Tue, February 7, 2012 3:30 pm, Christy Eller wrote: Hi- I have been gathering some more info about recent deployments. Thanks to Marina, I have added several more current deployments to our Deployments wiki page, https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments, including a one using GNOME 3.0.2. Thanks for working on this, it's great to have some current information there My suggestion is that we split off the older deployments to another page, called GNOME Deployments 2000-2008. I would prefer to have that info available, but I agree with Joanie that seeing a list of really old deployments could send a negative message. I would rename the current page to Current Gnome Deployments, and would refer to the older deployments page there. I chose those dates, because I want to make sure that the current page has enough data not to look too sparse. That sound really great to me. I agree with you and Joanie that it doesn't look good to have such old information on that main deployments page. I'm trying to track down info on another couple of deployments I know of too. karen I hope to be able to report on more, perhaps get updates on the ones that we have, and repair or retire the broken links. I also wonder if we should try to highlight this information in a more public place. If you have anything to add, it would be greatly appreciated! Christy On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Joanmarie Diggs jdi...@igalia.com wrote: Hey all. I just took a look at our Deployments page [1] in some detail. Here's what I found regarding the linked reports [2] of deployments: Summary: * 32 total * 12 broken (37.5%) * 18 = 5 years old (56.25%) * Of the remaining 2 (6.25%) from the past two years: * 1 uses GNOME 2.28 * 1 used GNOME 2.30 * 0% use GNOME 3.2 * 0% use GNOME 3.0 * 0% use GNOME 2.32 Details: * Austria: 2005 * Belgium: 2006, 2003, (broken) * Germany: 2005 * Ireland: (broken), 2004 * Italy: 2005 * Macedonia: 2005 * Spain: 2003, 2005, 2010 (but GNOME 2.28) * United Kingdom: (broken), (broken), (broken) * South America: 2003, (broken), 2004, 2005, (broken), (broken) * Australia: (broken; references GNOME 2.8) * China: 2005, (broken), 2003, (broken) * India: 2011 (but GNOME 2.30) * USA: 2002, (and a reference to 2005) * Canada: 2005 * Other Resources: 2004, (broken) My Opinions: * At the best, what this page communicates to the outside world (possibly including institutions considering whether or not to deploy GNOME) is that we have some serious cruft removal to do with respect to our marketing content. * At the worst, it suggests that modern/current deployments do not see GNOME 3.x as a viable option. * Are either of these messages something we wish to convey? I would argue no. * Were it me, I would investigate the present status of all of the existing deployments, remove those which are no longer valid, solicit new reports from those which are valid, investigate additional/missing deployments, and highlight those which are based on GNOME 3. And if this cannot be done, I'd remove the page entirely from our site because I do not think it helps our cause. * (It won't be me because I am busy contributing to the effort to ensure that we are accessible to users who are blind. ;) ) For what it's worth Take care. --joanie [1] https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments [2] As opposed to generic/institute sites -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Deployments page sends the wrong message
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org wrote: On Tue, February 7, 2012 3:30 pm, Christy Eller wrote: Hi- I have been gathering some more info about recent deployments. Thanks to Marina, I have added several more current deployments to our Deployments wiki page, https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments, including a one using GNOME 3.0.2. Thanks for working on this, it's great to have some current information there My suggestion is that we split off the older deployments to another page, called GNOME Deployments 2000-2008. I would prefer to have that info available, but I agree with Joanie that seeing a list of really old deployments could send a negative message. I would rename the current page to Current Gnome Deployments, and would refer to the older deployments page there. I chose those dates, because I want to make sure that the current page has enough data not to look too sparse. That sound really great to me. I agree with you and Joanie that it doesn't look good to have such old information on that main deployments page. I'm trying to track down info on another couple of deployments I know of too. What's this page used for? Is it worth the effort of ongoing maintenance? Allan -- IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/ -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Deployments page sends the wrong message
On Thu, February 9, 2012 6:57 am, Allan Day wrote: On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org wrote: On Tue, February 7, 2012 3:30 pm, Christy Eller wrote: Hi- I have been gathering some more info about recent deployments. Thanks to Marina, I have added several more current deployments to our Deployments wiki page, https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments, including a one using GNOME 3.0.2. Thanks for working on this, it's great to have some current information there My suggestion is that we split off the older deployments to another page, called GNOME Deployments 2000-2008. I would prefer to have that info available, but I agree with Joanie that seeing a list of really old deployments could send a negative message. I would rename the current page to Current Gnome Deployments, and would refer to the older deployments page there. I chose those dates, because I want to make sure that the current page has enough data not to look too sparse. That sound really great to me. I agree with you and Joanie that it doesn't look good to have such old information on that main deployments page. I'm trying to track down info on another couple of deployments I know of too. What's this page used for? Is it worth the effort of ongoing maintenance? In the most general way, I think it's important to have a place where we show people where GNOME is being used. More specifically, I have wanted to point potential new partners to this page but have hesitated because it's so out of date. It's nice to be able to show folks that GNOME is used successfully in real endeavours. Were the page somewhat current, we could also use it as a reference for grant applications and the like. karen -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Deployments page sends the wrong message
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org wrote: On Thu, February 9, 2012 6:57 am, Allan Day wrote: On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Karen Sandler ka...@gnome.org wrote: On Tue, February 7, 2012 3:30 pm, Christy Eller wrote: Hi- I have been gathering some more info about recent deployments. Thanks to Marina, I have added several more current deployments to our Deployments wiki page, https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments, including a one using GNOME 3.0.2. Thanks for working on this, it's great to have some current information there My suggestion is that we split off the older deployments to another page, called GNOME Deployments 2000-2008. I would prefer to have that info available, but I agree with Joanie that seeing a list of really old deployments could send a negative message. I would rename the current page to Current Gnome Deployments, and would refer to the older deployments page there. I chose those dates, because I want to make sure that the current page has enough data not to look too sparse. That sound really great to me. I agree with you and Joanie that it doesn't look good to have such old information on that main deployments page. I'm trying to track down info on another couple of deployments I know of too. What's this page used for? Is it worth the effort of ongoing maintenance? In the most general way, I think it's important to have a place where we show people where GNOME is being used. More specifically, I have wanted to point potential new partners to this page but have hesitated because it's so out of date. It's nice to be able to show folks that GNOME is used successfully in real endeavours. Were the page somewhat current, we could also use it as a reference for grant applications and the like. OK, just checking. :) Allan -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Re: Deployments page sends the wrong message
Hi- I have been gathering some more info about recent deployments. Thanks to Marina, I have added several more current deployments to our Deployments wiki page, https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments, including a one using GNOME 3.0.2. My suggestion is that we split off the older deployments to another page, called GNOME Deployments 2000-2008. I would prefer to have that info available, but I agree with Joanie that seeing a list of really old deployments could send a negative message. I would rename the current page to Current Gnome Deployments, and would refer to the older deployments page there. I chose those dates, because I want to make sure that the current page has enough data not to look too sparse. I hope to be able to report on more, perhaps get updates on the ones that we have, and repair or retire the broken links. I also wonder if we should try to highlight this information in a more public place. If you have anything to add, it would be greatly appreciated! Christy On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 3:23 AM, Joanmarie Diggs jdi...@igalia.com wrote: Hey all. I just took a look at our Deployments page [1] in some detail. Here's what I found regarding the linked reports [2] of deployments: Summary: * 32 total * 12 broken (37.5%) * 18 = 5 years old (56.25%) * Of the remaining 2 (6.25%) from the past two years: * 1 uses GNOME 2.28 * 1 used GNOME 2.30 * 0% use GNOME 3.2 * 0% use GNOME 3.0 * 0% use GNOME 2.32 Details: * Austria: 2005 * Belgium: 2006, 2003, (broken) * Germany: 2005 * Ireland: (broken), 2004 * Italy: 2005 * Macedonia: 2005 * Spain: 2003, 2005, 2010 (but GNOME 2.28) * United Kingdom: (broken), (broken), (broken) * South America: 2003, (broken), 2004, 2005, (broken), (broken) * Australia: (broken; references GNOME 2.8) * China: 2005, (broken), 2003, (broken) * India: 2011 (but GNOME 2.30) * USA: 2002, (and a reference to 2005) * Canada: 2005 * Other Resources: 2004, (broken) My Opinions: * At the best, what this page communicates to the outside world (possibly including institutions considering whether or not to deploy GNOME) is that we have some serious cruft removal to do with respect to our marketing content. * At the worst, it suggests that modern/current deployments do not see GNOME 3.x as a viable option. * Are either of these messages something we wish to convey? I would argue no. * Were it me, I would investigate the present status of all of the existing deployments, remove those which are no longer valid, solicit new reports from those which are valid, investigate additional/missing deployments, and highlight those which are based on GNOME 3. And if this cannot be done, I'd remove the page entirely from our site because I do not think it helps our cause. * (It won't be me because I am busy contributing to the effort to ensure that we are accessible to users who are blind. ;) ) For what it's worth Take care. --joanie [1] https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments [2] As opposed to generic/institute sites -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
Deployments page sends the wrong message
Hey all. I just took a look at our Deployments page [1] in some detail. Here's what I found regarding the linked reports [2] of deployments: Summary: * 32 total * 12 broken (37.5%) * 18 = 5 years old (56.25%) * Of the remaining 2 (6.25%) from the past two years: * 1 uses GNOME 2.28 * 1 used GNOME 2.30 * 0% use GNOME 3.2 * 0% use GNOME 3.0 * 0% use GNOME 2.32 Details: * Austria: 2005 * Belgium: 2006, 2003, (broken) * Germany: 2005 * Ireland: (broken), 2004 * Italy: 2005 * Macedonia: 2005 * Spain: 2003, 2005, 2010 (but GNOME 2.28) * United Kingdom: (broken), (broken), (broken) * South America: 2003, (broken), 2004, 2005, (broken), (broken) * Australia: (broken; references GNOME 2.8) * China: 2005, (broken), 2003, (broken) * India: 2011 (but GNOME 2.30) * USA: 2002, (and a reference to 2005) * Canada: 2005 * Other Resources: 2004, (broken) My Opinions: * At the best, what this page communicates to the outside world (possibly including institutions considering whether or not to deploy GNOME) is that we have some serious cruft removal to do with respect to our marketing content. * At the worst, it suggests that modern/current deployments do not see GNOME 3.x as a viable option. * Are either of these messages something we wish to convey? I would argue no. * Were it me, I would investigate the present status of all of the existing deployments, remove those which are no longer valid, solicit new reports from those which are valid, investigate additional/missing deployments, and highlight those which are based on GNOME 3. And if this cannot be done, I'd remove the page entirely from our site because I do not think it helps our cause. * (It won't be me because I am busy contributing to the effort to ensure that we are accessible to users who are blind. ;) ) For what it's worth Take care. --joanie [1] https://live.gnome.org/GnomeMarketing/GnomeDeployments [2] As opposed to generic/institute sites -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
