|| ||Dave Neary <dneary-AT-gnome.org> |
|| ||William Jon McCann <william.jon.mccann-AT-gmail.com> |
|| ||Re: community managers |
|| ||Fri, 16 Nov 2012 16:50:19 +0100|
|| ||GNOME Marketing List <marketing-list-AT-gnome.org>|
|| ||Article, Thread
On 11/15/2012 09:12 PM, William Jon McCann wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:38 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
> I think that as a project, we have had trouble communicating our
> vision, because as a project we are not sure what it is.
I think this is the main thing I wanted to say. I have been involved in
the GNOME project, albeit not as a core developer or module maintainer,
since 2004. And I do not understand our vision. What is the dream that
we're selling, and why should I be excited about it?
> For instance, the insistence that
> theming will damage our brand, or that Cinnamon is not GNOME 3, has
> led to missed opportunities for the GNOME project, and has not got
> grass roots support among the GNOME community (and I'm not talking
> about users here, I'm talking about contributors - developers,
> translators, user group co-ordinators, and marketers).
> Let's be clear then. Cinnamon is not GNOME 3.
I understand that is your position. And I understand that as the
maintainer and primary designer of GNOME Shell, you have a lot of weight
in holding that position.
I think it's a shame that Cinnamon users don't realise, for the most
part, that they are using GNOME Shell, and the rest of the GNOME 3
stack. I think that it's a shame that we have apparently gone out of our
way to put a barrier between ourselves and the Cinnamon/Mint guys by
saying "you're not GNOME 3". The message we're sending is, "your help is
not wanted, we don't like what you're doing".
Personally, I think that it'd be cool to have our community be the
community of people who can go wild on the platform - "let a thousand
flowers bloom". That the core GNOME project is solid and useful, but
that we encourage experimentation, respins, freedom for our users. That
seems inconsistent with the current GNOME messaging.
> The discussion of brand
> was in relation to the stability of extensions and the impact on the
> user experience - and was taken out of context. Neither of these have
> led to missed opportunities. Continuing to misrepresent or misunderstand
> what we are trying to do and trying to say doesn't help us communicate
> our vision, does it?
I certainly misunderstand what you are trying to do. I don't think I
know what the GNOME 3 vision is. Would you mind helping me understand
Dave Neary, Lyon, France
to post comments)