On 2011-04-07T11:19:55, Andrew Beekhof <andrew at beekhof.net> wrote:
> They didn't wait for red hat to add a quote too?
> Not a good start
Moving this over from the technical list, since it really isn't a
technical topic.
So yeah, that didn't go down so well, but I'd like to publicly reiterate
that there was no ill intent on behalf of the LF; they were in touch
with RHT's press group, and I had (mistakenly) assumed that both the LF
and its members had all done such things in the past and knew how to
communicate and handle the deadlines they had set. (I was in the air
when the release was finalized.)
I think the LF contacted RHT, Novell, LINBIT, NTT, Oracle, and possibly
IBM; all of them were given the same information and deadlines. We
should have indicated more clearly to the LF that this was mandatory,
but since I was (obviously) not in the direct Cc loop for agreeing on
the RHT quote, I had no insight there.
This has taught me to be a lot more careful - people actually read
things into the order the company names are listed on a slide. ("Why is
RHT listed first there?" when it was randomly sorted, "Why is Novell
listed first on the other?" when it was merely alphabetical. I got
complains from lawyers that a company name was listed in the draft
without permission (which was why it was sent around as a draft to get
exactly that!) as well as complaints that despite them not ack'ing it
it got removed from the final version. Whatever way one chooses, one
loses.)
Let me be more precise, actually: it has taught me that I never want to
be involved in a press release again ;-)
Regards,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG N?rnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
> They didn't wait for red hat to add a quote too?
> Not a good start
Moving this over from the technical list, since it really isn't a
technical topic.
So yeah, that didn't go down so well, but I'd like to publicly reiterate
that there was no ill intent on behalf of the LF; they were in touch
with RHT's press group, and I had (mistakenly) assumed that both the LF
and its members had all done such things in the past and knew how to
communicate and handle the deadlines they had set. (I was in the air
when the release was finalized.)
I think the LF contacted RHT, Novell, LINBIT, NTT, Oracle, and possibly
IBM; all of them were given the same information and deadlines. We
should have indicated more clearly to the LF that this was mandatory,
but since I was (obviously) not in the direct Cc loop for agreeing on
the RHT quote, I had no insight there.
This has taught me to be a lot more careful - people actually read
things into the order the company names are listed on a slide. ("Why is
RHT listed first there?" when it was randomly sorted, "Why is Novell
listed first on the other?" when it was merely alphabetical. I got
complains from lawyers that a company name was listed in the draft
without permission (which was why it was sent around as a draft to get
exactly that!) as well as complaints that despite them not ack'ing it
it got removed from the final version. Whatever way one chooses, one
loses.)
Let me be more precise, actually: it has taught me that I never want to
be involved in a press release again ;-)
Regards,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG N?rnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde