On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Emily Gonyer <[email protected]> wrote:

> I think Dave's point was that we missed an opportunity to keep
> Cinnamon as GNOME 3 - because at one point it was GNOME 3.x with
> extensions piled on. They have since forked and are truly a separate
>


Well, the thing is that GNOME 3 is considered the design and look of GNOME
3.  It's the default package.  You could argue that GNOME 3 + extensions
changing the look is not GNOME 3 from a branding issue.

Consider that Apple's look is very distinctive.  You can look at a computer
running OSX and know it is running OSX.

In this case, Cinnamon is not GNOME 3 from that perspective.  Now, it si
GNOME 3 in that uses the GNOME 3 platform but it's not what its designers
consider GNOME 3.

Now I agree that it would be great to say Cinnamon is based on GNOME 3 as
it shows what a flexible platform GNOME 3 is that it can be modified to be
so distinctive.


> project now, but that wasn't always the case. If we had made it clear
> that they & their users were still using GNOME 3, we might have been
> able to bring them into the larger GNOME tent and kept them from
> forking and going their separate way. Just because someone is using
> extensions doesn't mean they aren't using GNOME 3, any more than my
> use of HTTPS Everywhere, AdBlock Plus, etc in Firefox & Chromium make
> them different browsers.
>
>
We seem to be in a strange place where we are competing against our own
software modified by others - Mate and Cinnamon both who have gotten
marketshare.

sri


> Emily
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 3:12 PM, William Jon McCann
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Dave Neary <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think that as a project, we have had trouble communicating our vision,
> >> because as a project we are not sure what it is. There is a part of the
> >> project that has a very clear idea of their vision, but that vision has
> >> either not been clearly expressed, or what has been expressed has not
> got
> >> clear support from the community of contributors in the project. For
> >> instance, the insistence that theming will damage our brand, or that
> >> Cinnamon is not GNOME 3, has led to missed opportunities for the GNOME
> >> project, and has not got grass roots support among the GNOME community
> (and
> >> I'm not talking about users here, I'm talking about contributors -
> >> developers, translators, user group co-ordinators, and marketers).
> >
> >
> > Let's be clear then. Cinnamon is not GNOME 3. The discussion of brand
> was in
> > relation to the stability of extensions and the impact on the user
> > experience - and was taken out of context. Neither of these have led to
> > missed opportunities. Continuing to misrepresent or misunderstand what we
> > are trying to do and trying to say doesn't help us communicate our
> vision,
> > does it?
> >
> > Jon
> >
> >
> > --
> > marketing-list mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Whatever you can do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius,
> power and magic in it. -  Goethe
>
> Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't
> matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr.Seuss
>
> Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that
> counts can be counted. - Albert Einstein
> --
> marketing-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list
>
-- 
marketing-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list

Reply via email to