Re: Press release for 7.3 - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy
From | Justin Clift |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Press release for 7.3 |
Date | |
Msg-id | 3DC7476A.820E8F4F@postgresql.org Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Press release for 7.3 ("Josh Berkus" <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Press release for 7.3
Re: Press release for 7.3 |
List | pgsql-advocacy |
Josh Berkus wrote: > > Folks, > > We seem to be sort of stalled on the press release. I know that I, > for one, was holding further commentary, hoping for an opinion from > Justin. Sorry guys. Haven't been going flat out on adding some backend infrastructual stuff to the websites. > My opinion is that the press release should lead with what's *new* > about 7.3, and have what's great about PostgreSQL in general at the > bottom and on the (linked) Advocacy site. Not everyone agrees with > this perspective. > > Justin? It's probably the best move for the Community if we do assume that the majority of the press contacts that receive the release will indeed not know much (if anything) about PostgreSQL. If we release a Press Release that specifically doesn't have the "intro to PostgreSQL" type stuff at the top of it, then a lot of potential new contact people will "turn off" at this point. However, including this stuff means they can forward it on to people who've never even heard of PostgreSQL, and/or include it in places which would be considered "new markets". That's what we're trying to achieve after all. As a further consideration, the people who are familiar with PostgreSQL already will probably do at least 1 of two things: 1) Skip the bits not relevant to them (good) 2) Know that PostgreSQL is finally getting a Advocacy/Marketing aspect together (great) So, I strongly feel we should use the Press Release that Geoff wrote up as the basis for things and take it from there. Points of consideration with it are: - We should mention as soon as possible in it that the whole .info and soon-to-be .org domain name registries run on PostgreSQL. If we can somehow illustrate that all of the proposals for the .org contract were either Oracle "High Availability" solutions or PostgreSQL, and that we still won, all the better. :) - We should mention the licensing terms. Not "we use the BSD license", but something that brings meaning from that to the average CIO. "Our licensing means you can use PostgreSQL at no cost, in as many projects or installations as needed, and don't even have to tell us about it." Through the feedback form on the Advocacy site about 1/5 of the requests are to confirm there are indeed no licensing costs. To me this says its a strong "selling point" for some, strong enough that they take a look and then confirm it "Just to Make Sure". :) :-) Regards and best wishes, Justin Clift > -Josh Berkus > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? > > http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html -- "My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the first group; there was less competition there." - Indira Gandhi
pgsql-advocacy by date: