Tom Lane wrote:
Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
On Fri, 2003-06-13 at 01:08, Tom Lane wrote:
I wouldn't mind seeing a "core marketing" team evolve to parallel the
existing "core technical" team.
This overlooks the fact that you can't earn credibility with some of our
community unless you hack on the back-end.
That is the standard way to earn *technical* credibility in this
community, sure. What I'm suggesting is that credibility in the
advocacy/marketing area is a different currency. I still think
you have to earn the respect of your peers by hard work, but exactly
what that work is is quite different. Being a geek with no clue
about marketing, I don't actually know how one would go about building
a reputation in this area. I do know that having the technical core
team bless your efforts won't create any credibility of that kind,
because we have none to give.
This idea of a core marketing team is great, in my opinion.
So there will be some people realy focused on the press releases, case studies, advocacy site, events and such things, that are realy important and make the comunity stronger. The people working in this area would build their reputation based on this.
There's a interesting article on InfoWorld (
http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/05/23/21OPconnection_1.html) that says: "
A deeper examination of PostgresSQL suggests that it could be vastly under-hyped."
AFAIR people didn't have a problem with the press release as press
release, they just said that what *they* wanted to read was a more
technically oriented document, and they were bemoaning the lack of one.
Maybe the press release should have a link to a more technical doc.
IMHO the press release orientation was very good.
My regards,
--
Diogo de Oliveira Biazus
diogo@ikono.com.br
Ikono Sistemas e Automação
http://www.ikono.com.br
