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
