On Wednesday 02 February 2011 22:57:02 Adrian Schröter wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2011, 22:31:18 schrieb Jos Poortvliet: > > On Wednesday 02 February 2011 22:20:00 Nelson Marques wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 7:52 PM, Jos Poortvliet > > > <jospoortvl...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > I personally don't see it as a big issue directly - the only issue > > > > with > > > > it is that people clearly assume the "openSUSE Build Service" is > > > > there > > > > to "Build openSUSE Software". > > > > > > If people see it that way, maybe it's marketing failure? As you state > > > and I quote: > > > > > > «hat people clearly assume the "openSUSE Build Service" is there to > > > "Buil openSUSE Software".» > > > > > > This only points failure on marketing practices, marketing efforts are > > > failing in passing the message, but in reality, it's not actually far > > > from the reality. OBS plays it's role, it enables all the contents > > > distributed in openSUSE Linux distribution. > > > > Yes, it is failing marketing: choosing a wrong name, duh. openSUSE Build > > Service as a name quite strongly suggests that it's for openSUSE... And > > that is the problem. Surely OBS does that, but it does more - and the > > name doesn't support that. It IS a marketing failure. > > > > Interestingly enough, at LCA I attended a talk by a Red Hat developer > > about KOJI. It's Red Hat's/Fedora's build service. It's massively worse > > than OBS - you CAN build packages for other distro's but it's quite > > hard. The whole thing is much harder to use, can't cross-compile for > > other platforms and has to run on your own machine. Still, many people > > were interested in it. And part of that is because the name doesn't > > signal any distro-specificity. > > Just my 2cent on this: > > * I think when using the just the term "OBS" more strictly and avoiding the > full name, the problem would reduce a lot.
Well, ppl always want to know what it means - and "open (or openSUSE) build service" is a good start of an explanation. So I don't think this will really solve the issue. > * A rename should always consider the available DNS domains ;) hehehe yes, that is true... But doesn't openbuildservice.org already redirect to build.opensuse.org? Seems like we could go for that name then... Yes? > * OBS as term itself is actually less import for the end users. They just > see the result. A reason why the "PPA" term from ubuntu is so intrusive. True, for end-users the whole thing is very different. But this was mostly prompted by the issue with explaining this to packagers and other more technical people... > IMHO we need to finished this feature ASAP: > > https://features.opensuse.org/310109 > > and we need to find a cool and marketing-able name for (similar to > 1-click- install). This would reach way more people (in best case also > some non openSUSE users) and we have the chance in the second step to > educate them also better about OBS. We will grow afterwards. > > This feature just waits for a web developer since a longer time creating > a good proposal. The pure coding part will be realtive minimal, I think. Awesome idea for sure, and yes, it needs a good marketing name :D > Have fun on FOSDEM Thanks. We'll miss you... > adrian
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
