You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to marketing@couchdb.apache.org by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> on 2014/10/15 13:30:34 UTC
Linking to Professional Services
Heya Marketingers,
one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional services or support offerings.
My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and that commercial services are being catered to.
Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where that’s not an option.
Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website (or sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that exist so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if needed.
Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open questions:
- who decides which offerings get listed?
- what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
- how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after all?
- how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something first?
- etc.
*If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :)
*- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
What do you think?
Best
Jan
--
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
On 15 Oct 2014, at 14:05 , Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, I mean about to save ourselfs from the same history about splitting CouchDB team and creating new fork product, not exactly from some new thing with *couch* in name.
Ah, got it, sorry for misreading this!
I do think we should encourage people forking CouchDB and making their own product with services and everything, like Cloudera does with Hadoop and so on. This is a main reason why the ASF exists in the first place. Cloudant, in a way, does this already, and it is great for everybody, I’d like more of that :)
That said, we need to be a lot more diligent about this than we have in the past, because of the example you mention. This is exactly why I am bringing this up now :)
Both of that said, I don’t think this is a case we need to cover for now / until someone actually wants to go ahead with this. For now I’d be fine with covering support and services.
> Sorry, I misread your email idea.
>
> Was thought about creation own commercial CouchDB support in
> additional to community one for those who need more then just a help.
>
> With linking to existed professional services we should be ensured that they are reliable and provides well qualified service.
Right, how do we do that? :)
> Also, we shouldn't discourage regular community-driven support in case of "official support" commercial ones. Not sure how we'll handle this right.
Definitely, I see this framed in a way that it explicitly speaks to people who are specifically are looking for, say, commercial support. This isn’t to discourage the existing support channels, just add more offerings to help more people :)
Best
Jan
--
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On 15 Oct 2014, at 13:34 , Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> couch.io comes back? wouldn't it cause creation yet another couchbase?
>>>> or what should ensure people in that?
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, we have branding guidelines in the works as well. People won’t be able to use *couch* in their offering’s names.
>>
>> No, I mean about to save ourselfs from the same history about
>> splitting CouchDB team and creating new fork product, not exactly from
>> some new thing with *couch* in name.
>>
>> --
>> ,,,^..^,,,
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Ingo Radatz <th...@googlemail.com>.
My first thought was: lets create typical "CouchDB requirement profiles" - professional service provider themselves can categorise their plans into
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Akshat Jiwan Sharma <ak...@gmail.com>.
I think this is a great idea. We could add a section called something like
"services offered by the couchdb community" that contains a list of people
who work provide couchdb services. This list could be open allowing any one
to add himself/herself as a service provider. Much like how there are
sections on github projects called "people using .. so and so technology".
I think elastic search continuously does this to great effect. Although
they don't have an open section where any one could add their name but they
are always on the lookout for individuals who do exciting stuff on elastic
search and either feature them on their website or give them an opportunity
to talk through their events.
Showing that you have a community of people working on a platform can be
very persuasive.
In addidtion I would also like to suggest that we include a list of
companies who are using couchdb in production successfully.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I misread your email idea.
>
> Was thought about creation own commercial CouchDB support in
> additional to community one for those who need more then just a help.
>
> With linking to existed professional services we should be ensured
> that they are reliable and provides well qualified service. Also, we
> shouldn't discourage regular community-driven support in case of
> "official support" commercial ones. Not sure how we'll handle this
> right.
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> On 15 Oct 2014, at 13:34 , Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> couch.io comes back? wouldn't it cause creation yet another couchbase?
> >>> or what should ensure people in that?
> >>
> >>
> >> Well, we have branding guidelines in the works as well. People won’t be
> able to use *couch* in their offering’s names.
> >
> > No, I mean about to save ourselfs from the same history about
> > splitting CouchDB team and creating new fork product, not exactly from
> > some new thing with *couch* in name.
> >
> > --
> > ,,,^..^,,,
>
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, I misread your email idea.
Was thought about creation own commercial CouchDB support in
additional to community one for those who need more then just a help.
With linking to existed professional services we should be ensured
that they are reliable and provides well qualified service. Also, we
shouldn't discourage regular community-driven support in case of
"official support" commercial ones. Not sure how we'll handle this
right.
--
,,,^..^,,,
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 15 Oct 2014, at 13:34 , Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> couch.io comes back? wouldn't it cause creation yet another couchbase?
>>> or what should ensure people in that?
>>
>>
>> Well, we have branding guidelines in the works as well. People won’t be able to use *couch* in their offering’s names.
>
> No, I mean about to save ourselfs from the same history about
> splitting CouchDB team and creating new fork product, not exactly from
> some new thing with *couch* in name.
>
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 15 Oct 2014, at 13:34 , Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> couch.io comes back? wouldn't it cause creation yet another couchbase?
>> or what should ensure people in that?
>
>
> Well, we have branding guidelines in the works as well. People won’t be able to use *couch* in their offering’s names.
No, I mean about to save ourselfs from the same history about
splitting CouchDB team and creating new fork product, not exactly from
some new thing with *couch* in name.
--
,,,^..^,,,
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Sebastian Rothbucher <se...@googlemail.com>.
Hi,
+1 - esp. on what Garren / Javier said. I think such a program it can turn
complex quite quickly unless an elegant solution is there. And a "see here
for a whole lot of people who certainly can help you @ your own risk" is
elegant and simple...
Sebastian
On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Javier Candeira <ja...@candeira.com>
wrote:
> Having recently been on the buying end, it would have helped me if I
> could have shown my client a list of "specialists we can pay for
> support if needed", so +1.
>
> I'd suggest a very ligth curation, and buyer beware, rather than a
> heavy certification.
>
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Javier Candeira <ja...@candeira.com>.
Having recently been on the buying end, it would have helped me if I
could have shown my client a list of "specialists we can pay for
support if needed", so +1.
I'd suggest a very ligth curation, and buyer beware, rather than a
heavy certification.
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Noah Slater <ns...@apache.org>.
I think this is a great idea.
Inclusion on such a list should be as simple as putting it to a PMC
vote. If we need to formalise guidelines at some point, we can do that
in a lazy evaluated way. ;)
On 16 October 2014 11:06, Garren Smith <ga...@apache.org> wrote:
> I like the idea of linking of professional services. One thing I would like
> to see is that people that have committer status or are on the PMC are move
> visible. That will encourage other people that want to offer Couchdb
> services to contribute to Couchdb to get committer status.
>
> Cheers
> Garren
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 15 Oct 2014, at 14:34 , Andy Wenk <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Jan,
>> >
>> > I personally think it's a good idea. The questions you raised are the
>> ones
>> > we have to answer. My comments inline.
>> >
>> > On 15 October 2014 13:38, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>>> Heya Marketingers,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and
>> >> companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional
>> >> services or support offerings.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and
>> that
>> >> commercial services are being catered to.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where
>> >> that’s not an option.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer
>> >> services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website (or
>> >> sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that
>> exist
>> >> so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if
>> needed.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open
>> questions:
>> >>>> - who decides which offerings get listed?
>> >>
>> >
>> > if we restrict it - I think it should be reviewed / tested by a group of
>> > people (review team?) and approve in consensus.
>> >
>> >
>> >>>> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
>> >>
>> >
>> > if the before mentioned group has objections concerning:
>> >
>> > * general quality of the service / product
>> > * not following the branding and trademark rules
>> > * not clear who the people are behind the service
>> > * "black hat" people at the service
>> >
>> >
>> >>>> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after
>> all?
>> >>
>> >
>> > that's a hard question. Because of that, I proposed the review team
>> above.
>> > The service should be tested and granted for good. Maybe we say "after
>> our
>> > review and at this moment we think this is a good service. But we reserve
>> > the right to remove the service at a later point if it comes to our
>> > attention, that the service has become bad" or sth. like this. I think
>> you
>> > get the idea. So this goes a bit in a "CouchDB approved service"
>> > certificate or sth. similar.
>> >
>> >
>> >>>> - how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something
>> >> first?
>> >>>> - etc.
>> >>
>> >
>> > If I understand correctly I would like to ask, why there should be first
>> > come first serve at all? If there are more similar services, why not
>> adding
>> > them all?
>>
>> Heh, sorry, this wasn’t clearly expressed. I meant that we should list all
>> of them, but who get’s to be on top of the list? (simple list randomisation
>> per request would do, I just wanted to bring this up here :)
>>
>> Jan
>> --
>>
>>
>> >
>> > So the list above does maybe miss one point:
>> >
>> > - who is going to test the service?
>> >
>> >
>> >>>>
>> >>>> *If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache
>> >> projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that
>> >> answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :)
>> >>
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> >
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> *- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just
>> >> wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
>> >>>>
>> >>>> What do you think?
>> >>
>> >
>> > Basically a very great idea imho.
>> >
>> > Cheers
>> >
>> > Andy
>> >
>> > --
>> > Andy Wenk
>> > Hamburg - Germany
>> > RockIt!
>> >
>> > GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588
>> >
>> > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc
>>
>>
--
Noah Slater
https://twitter.com/nslater
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Garren Smith <ga...@apache.org>.
I like the idea of linking of professional services. One thing I would like
to see is that people that have committer status or are on the PMC are move
visible. That will encourage other people that want to offer Couchdb
services to contribute to Couchdb to get committer status.
Cheers
Garren
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 15 Oct 2014, at 14:34 , Andy Wenk <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > I personally think it's a good idea. The questions you raised are the
> ones
> > we have to answer. My comments inline.
> >
> > On 15 October 2014 13:38, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>>> Heya Marketingers,
> >>>>
> >>>> one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and
> >> companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional
> >> services or support offerings.
> >>>>
> >>>> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and
> that
> >> commercial services are being catered to.
> >>>>
> >>>> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where
> >> that’s not an option.
> >>>>
> >>>> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer
> >> services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website (or
> >> sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that
> exist
> >> so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if
> needed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open
> questions:
> >>>> - who decides which offerings get listed?
> >>
> >
> > if we restrict it - I think it should be reviewed / tested by a group of
> > people (review team?) and approve in consensus.
> >
> >
> >>>> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
> >>
> >
> > if the before mentioned group has objections concerning:
> >
> > * general quality of the service / product
> > * not following the branding and trademark rules
> > * not clear who the people are behind the service
> > * "black hat" people at the service
> >
> >
> >>>> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after
> all?
> >>
> >
> > that's a hard question. Because of that, I proposed the review team
> above.
> > The service should be tested and granted for good. Maybe we say "after
> our
> > review and at this moment we think this is a good service. But we reserve
> > the right to remove the service at a later point if it comes to our
> > attention, that the service has become bad" or sth. like this. I think
> you
> > get the idea. So this goes a bit in a "CouchDB approved service"
> > certificate or sth. similar.
> >
> >
> >>>> - how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something
> >> first?
> >>>> - etc.
> >>
> >
> > If I understand correctly I would like to ask, why there should be first
> > come first serve at all? If there are more similar services, why not
> adding
> > them all?
>
> Heh, sorry, this wasn’t clearly expressed. I meant that we should list all
> of them, but who get’s to be on top of the list? (simple list randomisation
> per request would do, I just wanted to bring this up here :)
>
> Jan
> --
>
>
> >
> > So the list above does maybe miss one point:
> >
> > - who is going to test the service?
> >
> >
> >>>>
> >>>> *If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache
> >> projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that
> >> answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :)
> >>
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> *- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just
> >> wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
> >>>>
> >>>> What do you think?
> >>
> >
> > Basically a very great idea imho.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > --
> > Andy Wenk
> > Hamburg - Germany
> > RockIt!
> >
> > GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588
> >
> > https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc
>
>
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
On 15 Oct 2014, at 14:34 , Andy Wenk <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> I personally think it's a good idea. The questions you raised are the ones
> we have to answer. My comments inline.
>
> On 15 October 2014 13:38, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>>> Heya Marketingers,
>>>>
>>>> one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and
>> companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional
>> services or support offerings.
>>>>
>>>> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and that
>> commercial services are being catered to.
>>>>
>>>> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where
>> that’s not an option.
>>>>
>>>> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer
>> services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
>>>>
>>>> I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website (or
>> sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that exist
>> so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if needed.
>>>>
>>>> Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open questions:
>>>> - who decides which offerings get listed?
>>
>
> if we restrict it - I think it should be reviewed / tested by a group of
> people (review team?) and approve in consensus.
>
>
>>>> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
>>
>
> if the before mentioned group has objections concerning:
>
> * general quality of the service / product
> * not following the branding and trademark rules
> * not clear who the people are behind the service
> * "black hat" people at the service
>
>
>>>> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after all?
>>
>
> that's a hard question. Because of that, I proposed the review team above.
> The service should be tested and granted for good. Maybe we say "after our
> review and at this moment we think this is a good service. But we reserve
> the right to remove the service at a later point if it comes to our
> attention, that the service has become bad" or sth. like this. I think you
> get the idea. So this goes a bit in a "CouchDB approved service"
> certificate or sth. similar.
>
>
>>>> - how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something
>> first?
>>>> - etc.
>>
>
> If I understand correctly I would like to ask, why there should be first
> come first serve at all? If there are more similar services, why not adding
> them all?
Heh, sorry, this wasn’t clearly expressed. I meant that we should list all of them, but who get’s to be on top of the list? (simple list randomisation per request would do, I just wanted to bring this up here :)
Jan
--
>
> So the list above does maybe miss one point:
>
> - who is going to test the service?
>
>
>>>>
>>>> *If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache
>> projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that
>> answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :)
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just
>> wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>
>
> Basically a very great idea imho.
>
> Cheers
>
> Andy
>
> --
> Andy Wenk
> Hamburg - Germany
> RockIt!
>
> GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588
>
> https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Andy Wenk <an...@apache.org>.
Hi Jan,
I personally think it's a good idea. The questions you raised are the ones
we have to answer. My comments inline.
On 15 October 2014 13:38, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >> Heya Marketingers,
> >>
> >> one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and
> companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional
> services or support offerings.
> >>
> >> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and that
> commercial services are being catered to.
> >>
> >> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where
> that’s not an option.
> >>
> >> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer
> services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
> >>
> >> I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website (or
> sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that exist
> so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if needed.
> >>
> >> Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open questions:
> >> - who decides which offerings get listed?
>
if we restrict it - I think it should be reviewed / tested by a group of
people (review team?) and approve in consensus.
> >> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
>
if the before mentioned group has objections concerning:
* general quality of the service / product
* not following the branding and trademark rules
* not clear who the people are behind the service
* "black hat" people at the service
> >> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after all?
>
that's a hard question. Because of that, I proposed the review team above.
The service should be tested and granted for good. Maybe we say "after our
review and at this moment we think this is a good service. But we reserve
the right to remove the service at a later point if it comes to our
attention, that the service has become bad" or sth. like this. I think you
get the idea. So this goes a bit in a "CouchDB approved service"
certificate or sth. similar.
> >> - how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something
> first?
> >> - etc.
>
If I understand correctly I would like to ask, why there should be first
come first serve at all? If there are more similar services, why not adding
them all?
So the list above does maybe miss one point:
- who is going to test the service?
> >>
> >> *If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache
> projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that
> answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :)
>
+1
> >>
> >>
> >> *- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just
> wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
> >>
> >> What do you think?
>
Basically a very great idea imho.
Cheers
Andy
--
Andy Wenk
Hamburg - Germany
RockIt!
GPG fingerprint: C044 8322 9E12 1483 4FEC 9452 B65D 6BE3 9ED3 9588
https://people.apache.org/keys/committer/andywenk.asc
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org>.
On 15 Oct 2014, at 13:34 , Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> couch.io comes back? wouldn't it cause creation yet another couchbase?
> or what should ensure people in that?
Well, we have branding guidelines in the works as well. People won’t be able to use *couch* in their offering’s names.
> --
> ,,,^..^,,,
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Heya Marketingers,
>>
>> one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional services or support offerings.
>>
>> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and that commercial services are being catered to.
>>
>> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where that’s not an option.
>>
>> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
>>
>> I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website (or sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that exist so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if needed.
>>
>> Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open questions:
>> - who decides which offerings get listed?
>> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
>> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after all?
>> - how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something first?
>> - etc.
>>
>> *If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :)
>>
>>
>> *- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Best
>> Jan
>> --
>>
>>
Re: Linking to Professional Services
Posted by Alexander Shorin <kx...@gmail.com>.
couch.io comes back? wouldn't it cause creation yet another couchbase?
or what should ensure people in that?
--
,,,^..^,,,
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:30 PM, Jan Lehnardt <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Heya Marketingers,
>
> one of the things I keep noticing in the field is that people and companies decide against using CouchDB because there are no professional services or support offerings.
>
> My main objective is showing that CouchDB is a viable solution and that commercial services are being catered to.
>
> Of course there is Cloudant, but there are enough scenarios where that’s not an option.
>
> Also of course, there are a number of people and companies that offer services for CouchDB, e.g. Benoit.
>
> I think it’d be a great boost for the project if the main website (or sub-page) would have a direct pointer to the various offerings that exist so end users get a feel for how good they can be taken care of, if needed.
>
> Say we all agree that it’s a good idea*, there are a few open questions:
> - who decides which offerings get listed?
> - what would be a rule or guideline for refusing an entry?
> - how do we deal with offers that turn out not to be so good after all?
> - how can we avoid a “first come first serve” rush to offer something first?
> - etc.
>
> *If* we are going anywhere, I think we should look at other Apache projects and other open source projects and come up with guidelines that answer the above questions (and the ones you come up with :)
>
>
> *- If we don’t agree that’s a good idea, that’s also fine, I just wanted to get a discussion around this going :)
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best
> Jan
> --
>
>