Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 16:37:46 +0200 From: Joel Dahl <joel@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Joseph Koshy <jkoshy@FreeBSD.ORG>, doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en/news press.xml Message-ID: <1152542266.717.21.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20060707223928.F80381@fledge.watson.org> References: <20060707185523.102F616A524@hub.freebsd.org> <20060707223928.F80381@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2006-07-07 at 22:42 +0100, Robert Watson wrote: > On Fri, 7 Jul 2006, Joseph Koshy wrote: > > >> Is this really FreeBSD news? The article you committed a link to doesn't > >> mention FreeBSD at all. PC-BSD may be running FreeBSD under the hood, but > >> I'm not sure that this belongs in the news section on the front page @ > >> FreeBSD.org. > > > > The mention is in the 'In the Press' page though, not in the 'news' section. > > > >> I'm not saying that it's wrong to add it, but can we please have some sort > >> of discussion about this? Where do we draw the line? Is news about > >> DesktopBSD, FreeSBIE, FreeNAS, DragonFlyBSD etc allowed if we allow news > >> about PC-BSD? > > > > DesktopBSD, FreeSBIE, Frenzy & PC-BSD are still FreeBSD and mention of them > > in the press would be IMHO ok for inclusion in our 'FreeBSD in the Media' > > link collection. > > > > I've also linked to good 'generic BSD' press articles in the past from our > > 'Press' page. Advocacy has fuzzy boundaries... > > > > I wish we had a better way of sharing advocacy & marketing efforts with our > > derivative projects. > > Ditto. I think we should be as supportive as we can for these projects, both > in terms of interacting with them for PR purposes, but also on technical > grounds to try and preemptively help identify and address problems they have > with FreeBSD as it stands, and finding ways to support their future FreeBSD > use. We've benefitted a lot from FreeSBIE's involvement in FreeBSD > especially. > > "Scalability" has always been one of the more interesting issues in how the > FreeBSD Project is structured. By having a strong and centralized core > development team and repository, we've built a really nice and tightly > integrated system. However, it's also had the effect of reducing the number > of spin-off and derivative projects. This has had many benefits, but there > are benefits to having those projects with their own specific focuses and > identity exist as well, and making sure that they fit into a more broad > FreeBSD ecosystem. Most of us may be focused on FreeBSD in the server, but > more power to people who want to make it work well on the desktop, in live > CDs, etc. And especially if they do a good job on advocacy, finding ways to > bring FreeBSD to places it's not been before. Agreed. We should definitely support projects like PC-BSD and FreeSBIE, as news about them can create more interest in FreeBSD. However, we should also always make sure to explain in which way the project relates to FreeBSD when we add them to one of our news boxes, especially in cases like this, when the article in question doesn't mention FreeBSD or in what way FreeBSD and PC-BSD relates to each other. Something like "The FreeBSD-based xxx ..." is probably sufficient, which is exactly what Joseph did. :-) I have no objections. Keep up the good work. :-) -- Joel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1152542266.717.21.camel>