I believe those who say that trying to sell Flex or FlexJS to a client is difficult.
I don't have hard data to back this, but I've always felt that there are two kinds of Flex customers. One set builds their own applications and thus can choose their own development technologies. Another set builds applications for other people and have to complete against other candidates wanting to build those same applications. I believe the first set have Flex apps that need to migrate to something else by 2020. I'm surprised there isn't more noise on our lists, but I think I'm seeing an increase in interest on our lists. IMO, these are the customers it will be easier for us to win over since they have an existing code base in ActionScript and already buy into the fundamentals of Flex. I think there will be enough of these customers to keep us busy polishing the components. Gaining traction in the second set is harder. I am hopeful that success and lessons learned serving the first set will get us to the point where we are truly ready to compare our code against the other frameworks out there. And we might need a different brand name. You don't have to wait, you can try to promote our code in that arena now, but I am concerned that we have too many rough edges right now. Our doc isn't up to date and doesn't look great. And we need more doc. I'll be trying to get the doc build working today, and we need to get this working better for both sets of customers and more volunteers are welcome to help. But I think the only question we want answered before the board meeting is whether the project name FlexJS is going to make it hard to build a brand with a different name to considered against the other JS frameworks. I think it won't. Carlos and Om, I feel like you haven't answered the question about PROJECT name. I don't think there is anybody saying we shouldn't build a different brand on a different PRODUCT name later. Do you feel like the PROJECT name of FlexJS is going to be a hindrance, and why? Thanks, -Alex On 9/13/17, 10:57 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala" <omup...@gmail.com on behalf of bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Sep 13, 2017 9:39 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >My main concern was with the JS suffix. If we can create new products >without the JS suffix that’s fine with me. > >On the other hand, if Carlos or someone else feels passionate about a name >change and volunteers to deal with the overhead I wouldn’t go against it. > > >I agree with Carlos. Bringing in the word Flex-something into a >conversation with peers is proving to be hard. > >If anything, a new name would bring a fresh perspective on this wonderful >technology. > >I volunteer to help out with the branding as much as I can. > >Thanks, >Om > > > >From: Alex Harui<mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 6:33 PM >To: dev@flex.apache.org<mailto:dev@flex.apache.org> >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork > >Actually, my question was whether the PROJECT name is more or less >important than the PRODUCT name. Mostly, the board/infra doesn't want us >to change the PROJECT name. Infra replied that we can create PRODUCTs >with names that do not match the PROJECT name. > >So, could we live with the PROJECT being called FlexJS forever? If we >think we can target a different group of customers with a different >PRODUCT name we can discuss what that name is later. Now AIUI, if we do >stick with FlexJS as the PROJECT, and later decide to create a PRODUCT >called Foo, I think somewhere on web pages for Foo it will link back >eventually to our source repositories and other pages that have the >PROJECT name "FlexJS" on it and people might go "Huh, I didn't know that >Foo was based on FlexJS". But will they run away? > >I buy lots of foods with brand names that I have no idea who the actual >manufacturer is. In the US, a fancy brand of cookies (Pepperidge Farm) is >manufactured by the same company that makes cheap condensed soup >(Campbells). A popular salad dressing is made by a well-known bleach >company (Clorox). So, I agree with Carlos that it might be worth building >a whole new brand without the word Flex in it, but I think the only >question we need to answer right now is whether the PROJECT name "FlexJS" >will be a hindrance to building that brand. > >Thoughts? >-Alex > >On 9/13/17, 4:07 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Yes. If we might change the name after forming the new PMC, it’s a >>concern. Alex’s question is more about the framework developing into >>something else in the future. That’s something I don’t think we need to >>be concerned about right now. >> >>I’d rather capitalize on the FlexJS name. >> >>Harbs >> >>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> >>>wrote: >>> >>> I thought that name things was one of the concerns in the thread from >>> board. >>
