Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Users] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
> "John" == John Crispin writes: >> IMHO if you want to add "freshness" and still leverage the old brand >> you do something like, e.g., Pepsi Zero. You do "The OpenWRT LEDE >> Edition!". >> >> Just a thought. >> John> certainly an interesting idea worth considering. FWIW, when our CWN was considering a rebranding (we still are, on the back burner), the advice we got was to phase in name changes over time scales of a year or so, with co-branding during the transition, very gradually increasing emphasis on the new name and decreasing emphasis on the old name. All names have upsides and downsides. -- Russell Senior, President russ...@personaltelco.net ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Users] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On 22/12/2016 16:57, Karl O. Pinc wrote: > On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:58:22 -0800 (PST) > David Lang wrote: > >> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: > >>> claiming that there is only one option and no alternatives is just >>> not constructive and wont lead to a broad discussion during which >>> we can find a consensus. >> >> sorry, I did not mean to imply there is only one option. > > IMHO if you want to add "freshness" and still leverage the > old brand you do something like, e.g., Pepsi Zero. You do > "The OpenWRT LEDE Edition!". > > Just a thought. > certainly an interesting idea worth considering. John ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 8:22 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: > Currently, LEDE has the same problem as LibreOffice, but compounded by > the fact that most people have no idea what LEDE is, let alone that it's > somehow related to OpenWRT. Not only this, but LibreOffice and OpenOffice are both, well, clearly office application suites from the name. LEDE stands for "Linux Embedded Development Environment", which to me, doesn't really even imply "Linux distribution". A development environment could be an IDE and some various tools-- I'm not sure "development environment" is a great way to characterize this project. There's also the problem that if you search for LEDE, at the very least Google wanted to know if I'd misspelled "lead", or if I was referring to the journalistic definition of "lede"-- it's kind of a generic name. While personally I like the idea of keeping the name OpenWRT, the argument for potentially rebranding does make some sense-- but it might be a good idea to consider other potential names too, that might be a bit less generic? Although this might be rehashing a discussion that already happened a number of months ago. Ben Rosser ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
>> - While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the >> brand recognition. I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or >> OpenOffice-> LibreOffice. > I would point at OpenOffice -> LibreOffice as a failure of name changes. There are several aspects in a name change. E.g. whether someone who hears the new name is likely to know what it is and that it's related to the old name. In the case of LibreOffice, I think this part of the name change worked just fine: all people I know who know OpenOffice also recognize LibreOffice as "the name as some OpenOffice-derivative". So it does carry over the brand recognition. Yes, there are a lot of people who still download OO, but that part of the problem is linked to the fact that the two projects didn't merge, so there was no effort on the OO part to educate people about the new name and redirect them to the LibreOffice web site, doc, etc... Currently, LEDE has the same problem as LibreOffice, but compounded by the fact that most people have no idea what LEDE is, let alone that it's somehow related to OpenWRT. Stefan ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On 22/12/2016 09:58, David Lang wrote: > On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: > >> On 22/12/2016 09:42, David Lang wrote: >>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: >>> > Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, > but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some > point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the > historical > reasons for the name. a problem that can be solved by a http redirect ... >>> >>> Is that going to break all links in discussions that point at OpenWRT >>> docs and/or forum threads? >>> >>> That's a high cost. >>> >>> David Lang >> >> it is something worth considering if the alternative content is >> available and easy to look up and if we keep archives in ro mode of >> existing content. >> >> claiming that there is only one option and no alternatives is just not >> constructive and wont lead to a broad discussion during which we can >> find a consensus. > > sorry, I did not mean to imply there is only one option. > > I think there is a lot of value in the OpenWRT name and all the links > around the web that refer to it. So there is a huge cost to going with a > different name. > > IMHO, this makes it an easy decision to make, but not the only one > possible. well i think you are just not considering options properly but simply claiming that this is the easy road to take so lets take it. i find your mail to be the contrary of something that can be used to start a broad discussion which will hopefully lead to a consensus. John ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: On 22/12/2016 09:42, David Lang wrote: On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the historical reasons for the name. a problem that can be solved by a http redirect ... Is that going to break all links in discussions that point at OpenWRT docs and/or forum threads? That's a high cost. David Lang it is something worth considering if the alternative content is available and easy to look up and if we keep archives in ro mode of existing content. claiming that there is only one option and no alternatives is just not constructive and wont lead to a broad discussion during which we can find a consensus. sorry, I did not mean to imply there is only one option. I think there is a lot of value in the OpenWRT name and all the links around the web that refer to it. So there is a huge cost to going with a different name. IMHO, this makes it an easy decision to make, but not the only one possible. David Lang ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On 22/12/2016 09:42, David Lang wrote: > On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: > >>> Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, >>> but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some >>> point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the historical >>> reasons for the name. >> >> a problem that can be solved by a http redirect ... > > Is that going to break all links in discussions that point at OpenWRT > docs and/or forum threads? > > That's a high cost. > > David Lang it is something worth considering if the alternative content is available and easy to look up and if we keep archives in ro mode of existing content. claiming that there is only one option and no alternatives is just not constructive and wont lead to a broad discussion during which we can find a consensus. John ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On Thu, 22 Dec 2016, John Crispin wrote: Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the historical reasons for the name. a problem that can be solved by a http redirect ... Is that going to break all links in discussions that point at OpenWRT docs and/or forum threads? That's a high cost. David Lang ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On 22/12/2016 09:40, David Lang wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Stefan Monnier wrote: > >> - While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the >> brand recognition. I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or >> OpenOffice->LibreOffice. > > I would point at OpenOffice -> LibreOffice as a failure of name changes. > > David Lang again, they did not change the name as a team but were split. if we choose to not use owrt but some different name then a simple http redirect can help solve the problem. John > ___ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [LEDE-DEV] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On 22/12/2016 09:36, David Lang wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Dave Taht wrote: > >> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote: >>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: >>> From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand attached to the development moving forward. >>> >>> >>> I agree, I think this is an obvious choice to make. OpenWRT has a lot of >>> name recognition, it would be foolish to throw that away. >> >> Just to take the other side for rhetorical purposes, a purpose of a >> re-branding exercise is to show a change in the "product" or >> organisation behind it. OpenWrt is widely known... as a bleeding edge, >> sometimes unstable, somewhat hard to use 3rd party firmware. DD-Wrt >> and Tomato get a lot more press for some reason. So do things like >> Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals, coherently, >> preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make >> sense. > > I'll point out OpenOffice vs LibreOffice and the fact that years after > development of OO has really stopped, people are still finding it and > downloading it instead of LO (it's replacement) > > there's a lot of stuff out there pointing at OpenWRT, unless you are > going to replace all the OpenWRT stuff with pointers to LEDE, you are > better off taking advantage of the millions of references to OpenWRT. > > David Lang > > Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, > but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some > point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the historical > reasons for the name. a problem that can be solved by a http redirect ... John ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Stefan Monnier wrote: - While brands have value, you can change a name without losing all the brand recognition. I'm thinking here of cases like XBMC->Kodi or OpenOffice->LibreOffice. I would point at OpenOffice -> LibreOffice as a failure of name changes. David Lang ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Dave Taht wrote: On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang wrote: On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote: From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand attached to the development moving forward. I agree, I think this is an obvious choice to make. OpenWRT has a lot of name recognition, it would be foolish to throw that away. Just to take the other side for rhetorical purposes, a purpose of a re-branding exercise is to show a change in the "product" or organisation behind it. OpenWrt is widely known... as a bleeding edge, sometimes unstable, somewhat hard to use 3rd party firmware. DD-Wrt and Tomato get a lot more press for some reason. So do things like Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals, coherently, preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make sense. I'll point out OpenOffice vs LibreOffice and the fact that years after development of OO has really stopped, people are still finding it and downloading it instead of LO (it's replacement) there's a lot of stuff out there pointing at OpenWRT, unless you are going to replace all the OpenWRT stuff with pointers to LEDE, you are better off taking advantage of the millions of references to OpenWRT. David Lang Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer, but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the historical reasons for the name. ___ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
