[Sugar-devel] [IAEP] Sugar on a Stick v2 Release Naming

[Martin Dengler]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 09:41:31AM +0200, Sean DALY wrote:
> I'm sorry Martin, I thought I was answering

You were but there's a lot of extra information that's sometimes hard
to parse - ultimately someone needs to put an image file in a
directory...so I was hoping that you would just say "yes" or "no - use
[this one]" when I asked you:

> > Ah - so perhaps this:
> >
> > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/File:Logo_white_05.png
> >
> > ...is the logo you want, not the one I mentioned in my email:
> >
> > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/File:Logo_white_04.png

[Hoped for:]
> YES - use #5
[or]
> NO - use #4

But the reason I'm dragging this out even further is I got:

> About the logo, it's the "blueberriest" one we will want, variant 4

Aha so it's 4...but no, wait:

> the one we used in the marketing materials prepared for the Strawberry
> launch, variant 6:
> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Marketing_Team/BoothBanners

...so it's...6?!

So do you want 4 (like you said first above) or 6 (like you said
second above) or 5 (like you said earlier since you want it to be one
of the ones from the beauty shot that clearly doesn't have 4 or 6)?


> No, there wasn't "marketing decided", it was Tomeu who thought of
> flavors, myself who thought of ice cream flavors (preferably fruit
> since "natural" wholesome sugars, a "fun treat for kids"), and
> sdziallas who agreed to the idea at the marketing meeting.

Tomeu suggested exactly what he suggested, which was clearly NOT
flavours: "Cherry-Oak" is not a flavour.  You and Eben were talking
about colours explicitly and nobody said _anything_ about flavours:

>>> [SeanDaly]
>> [Eben]
> [Tomeu]
>>> Nota: my idea would be for each version to change the Sugar logo
>>> color too... potentially allowing troubleshooters to ask "what
>>> color is the Sugar logo?" and match that to the version number.
>>
>> I actually think changing the colors with each release is a pretty
>> awesome idea.
>
> So awesome that it may solve the controversial issue of naming
> releases: Banana-Chocolate Sugar, Cherry-Oak Sugar, etc

When I say "marketing decided ice cream", I mean:

1) marketing came up with the idea:

[11:16:41] <SeanDaly> So, why not name SoaS versions as flavors, based
on the boot logo color?
[...]
[11:18:38] <SeanDaly> caroline: I think the ice cream metaphor can
really serve us

2) marketing championed it

[12:30:02] <SeanDaly> sdziallas: OK for SoaS v1 with a flavor name?
[...]
[12:30:44] <SeanDaly> I rather like strawberry as a first one, but i
don't think we have a logo that color

3) marketing called the vote:

[12:34:07] <SeanDaly> Can we go with logo 06 "Strawberry" for this
  release?
[12:34:26] <SeanDaly> we can disagree all summer over the next one
  (joke)
[...]
[12:35:54] <mtd> strawberry +1
[...]
[12:36:24] <caroline> strawberry +1
[...]
[12:36:49] <sdziallas> strawberry +1 from me, too ;)

4) and marketing corrected me about the etymology :)

It's certainly not worth the ink I've made you spill on it but it is
nice to be able to say where the buck stopped with a given decision.
If you don't want it pinned on you, ok :).


> The key takeaway is that marketing is not something that is tacked
> on at the end when something is ready for release, it's part of the
> development process.

Sure, that's why we're having this discussion, right?

> But, again, there's no advantage to choosing the flavor/color beyond
> the next one. We should together pick the v3 flavor in a few months,
> not as a function of the 12 logos we have, but rather the catchiest
> and most fun one.

Ok, I'm convinced.


> [marketing tips]
> Is this clear I hope?

That marketing lesson was very clear and interesting - you should
teach a course!

> thanks
> 
> Sean

Martin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20090910/9f5c728c/attachment-0001.pgp