[OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating

Thu Jun 10 08:49:55 PDT 2010

> Your comments have been good in that they have made me think deeper

(Great, what more could anyone hope for?)

Anyway, I think you might be selling OSGeo short -- our very presence indicates an implicit  level of coordination and maturity that people will intuitively and implicitly grok.

-mpg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter
> Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 3:25 PM
> To: discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating
> 
> Michael,
> Your comments have been good in that they have made me think deeper
> about what OSGeo stands for and then how we market that. Successful
> product companies first find out what the market wants, the build a
> marketing message, then build the product to fit the market. Developing
> a shiny product then discovering no-one wants it is a sad but common
> story.
> 
> In our case, we have created a brand called "OSGeo Incubation". What
> does that mean? Why is it valuable? How can we get that message across
> to our target market of GIS users who are interested in Open Source but
> don't know what OSGeo is?
> 
> If OSGeo Incubation doesn't represent quality or maturity (which is
> what
> the market are looking for) then what is the point of spending years of
> volunteer time going through incubation?
> 
> I'm afraid that "OSGeo Project" is not a compelling sales message to
> our
> target market, unless we can tie the message to quality or maturity (or
> another word with similar meaning).
> 
> Unless we can provide such positive marketing, I expect that we will
> have spin off projects or organisations "defect" from OSGeo create
> their
> own marketing message. (I wouldn't be surprise if OpenGeo had similar
> thoughts before they created and then marketed the OpenGeo suite.)
> 
> Marketing like everything else has positives and negatives.
> Positives:
> + Lots of users which draws in money and developers and we all make
> money and thrive
> 
> Negatives:
> - We need to distill our messages down into marketing sound bytes and
> generalised rating systems and the like
> 
> - We need to be honest in describing ours and others projects because
> that is what the market wants to hear before they will spend money on
> us
> 
> 
> On 08/06/10 09:17, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> > Since this is an OSGeo-based CD, presumably with the OSGeo logo all
> over it in various places, I'd suggest there are only three kinds of
> projects:
> >
> >   - those which are "Approved by OSGeo"
> >   - those which are "Undergoing OSGeo Approval"
> >   - everything else
> >
> > With two simple logos you can indicate projects of the first two
> categories; I don't think much explanation should be required up front,
> especially if one avoids jargon words like "graduated" and
> "incubation".
> >
> > -mpg
> >
> >
> > From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Cameron Shorter
> > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 3:57 PM
> > To: discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating
> >
> > There have been some passionate views against rating projects.
> >
> > Maybe I should start by explaining the drivers which led to the
> proposal for a 5 star rating.
> >
> > Previously only OSGeo graduated and incubation projects were promoted
> by OSGeo at conferences and the like, however, with the OSGeo LiveDVD,
> we are packaging and hence promoting many non-graduated projects. How
> do we credit that a project has gone through the extensive graduation
> process in our marketing material in a manner that will be understood
> by the target audience?
> >
> > Unfortunately, putting "OSGeo Graduated" against a project is
> meaningless because the target audience usually hasn't heard of OSGeo
> and is even less likely to know what "Graduated" means.
> >
> > We could write a paragrah explaining what OSGeo and Graduation are on
> each Project Overview flier, but that wastes valuable marketing real-
> estate.
> >
> > Note: I'm basing our target audience on the typical profile of people
> who drop by the OSGeo booth at conferences. They pick up a LiveDVD and
> fliers which have "Open Source" on the cover. They are typically GIS
> users, have heard of Open Source and want to know what Open Source
> packages are available to replace their existing XXXX, but usually
> haven't heard of OSGeo and almost certainly don't know about the
> graduation process. They want to know about the best 2 or 3 packakges
> they should consider, and they definitely don't want to have to trawl
> through 350 software packages on http://freegis.org . They spend 5 to
> 20 minutes talking at the OSGeo stand, then walk onto the other 50
> exhibition booths at the conference.
> > Visitors to the OSGeo website are probably similar in profile, but we
> don't get such a good opportunity to meet them face to face as we do at
> conferences.
> >
> > So the challenge is:
> > * How do we credit OSGeo Graduated projects in a manner
> understandable to GIS users new to Open Source?
> > * How can we credit other stable Open Source projects, while still
> acknowledging the extra kudos of passing graduation?
> > * How can we provide this message distinctly on marketing material so
> that it doesn't waste valuable marketing real-estate?
> >
> >
> > On 08/06/10 02:30, Michael P. Gerlek wrote:
> > [foolishly stepping in where I should fear to tread.]
> > This has been asked for before, but historically some projects have
> not step up to the plate for providing such materials - for a variety
> of reasons, some good and some not so good.
> > OSGeo should simply put a link to the project's "marketing" section,
> and if the project owners provide content on the other end, then good -
> if not, then so be it.
> > I'm all about providing quality user experiences, but anything more
> than that is likely not worth the effort required.  Our users are, for
> the most part, a very savvy and discriminating bunch.  And for apps
> that are explicitly targeting users outside of the normal open source
> types, it should be up to them to provide the "marketing" materials
> they deem appropriate.
> > -mpg
> >
> > From: discuss-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Bob Basques
> > Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 9:24 AM
> > To: OSGeo Discussions
> > Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] 5 Star OSGeo project maturity rating
> >
> > All,
> >
> > Did anyone else hear that thunder in the distance?  :c)
> >
> > That's what I've been trying to say, let the projects handle this
> sort of thing themselves, but OSGEO CAN (and SHOULD in my mind)
> coordinate a standardized look and feel to such things.
> >
> > bobb
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>> Howard Butler<hobu.inc at gmail.com>  wrote:
> >>>>
> > On Jun 7, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Bob Basques wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Wouldn't it seem prudent to classify the projects before trying to
> compare them?
> >>
> > /me screams into a room that no one can hear.  Stop it!
> >
> > This whole exercise is quite frankly, masturbatory, and does nothing
> to help the projects who would be rated, provides very little to those
> "users" of said ratings, and calls into question our credibility by
> having the arrogance to rate *our own* projects in any way.  OSGeo is
> doing enough by providing visibility for the projects, and it is up to
> them to pull them in as users with the quality of their software, the
> quality of their documentation, and the quality of their community.  A
> silly sticker by us or anyone else isn't going to sway that process in
> any way.
> >
> > It would be more valuable to collate a series of "elevator pitch"-
> type material from each project who wishes to participate to make their
> case to the envisioned users of this rating.  Projects who do not
> participate in this for whatever reason implicitly make a statement
> about their quality. That's going to be far more useful to both the
> projects and the users than an elongating graphic.
> >
> > Howard_______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Discuss mailing list
> > Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Cameron Shorter
> Geospatial Director
> Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050
> Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254
> 
> Think Globally, Fix Locally
> Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source
> http://www.lisasoft.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss