My two cents on the protocol site would be that we should create a section on the apache site and/or wiki dedicated to protocols. The waveprotocol.org domain could point to that.
On 7/8/13 7:53 AM, "John Blossom" <[email protected]> wrote: >Ali, >Thanks so much, thoughts below. Best, John > >On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Ali Lown <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Heh. This saves us having to write an [ANNOUNCE] for you... >> >FIRST! Tee hee. > >> >> > One key thing that I'd like to chip away at is getting our Web >>presences >> > sussed out a bit more. Web sites/ownership, social media presences, >> > communications with the media - all of these need to get organized for >> > success. >> >> I am not sure what sort of 'social media presence' would make sense >> for an Apache project? Could you clarify? >> >One of the challenges that many products/platforms have is awareness of a >given presence as a brand. When people say "Apache Wave" in places like >Facebook or Google+ or Twitter, for example, we want people to "catch on" >that Apache Wave communicates about itself via social media to developers >and to the public via more than just its own Web site. So it would make >sense to have for official announcements and general communications a >Facebook page, a Google+ page, a Twitter account and perhaps a LinkedIn >account. This is important for people referencing us in their posts as >well >as for our own communications. So, for example, when I write a post in >Google+ that references "Apache Wave," a "+Apache Wave" link will provide >a >hyperlink in that post to an Apache Wave page on Google+, which can have >announcements and links to our official site. These are fundamental and >important marketing tools, IMO, and can enable us to publicise key >milestones and services availability more effectively. > > >> >> > Example: shouldn't waveprotocol.org be labeled clearly as an >> > Apache Wave asset? >> >> The wave protocol site is controlled by Michael (IIRC), and is was not >> originally directly related to the Apache project, rather the >> open-source protocol behind wave. (Of which we seem to have become the >> keepers). >> >> We have had several attempts in the past to migrate the useful >> information over to the wiki here, which I think is now complete. >> (If anybody knows any relevant, up-to-date information left on >> waveprotocol.org that is not on the wiki here, please add it!) >> As such, I don't know if there is any point in keeping >> waveprotocol.org any more? (Perhaps it should just redirect to our >> incubator site?) >> > >I am thinking that a redirect would be the right thing to do if all of the >information is migrated, presuming that we have control of the DNS record >to do this. We need to make the Apache ownership of the brand 100 percent >clear. > >> >> Ali >>
