[LEDE-DEV] [OpenWrt-Devel] Talks between OpenWrt and LEDE

[John Crispin]

On 22/12/2016 09:36, David Lang wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Dave Taht wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:29 PM, David Lang <david at lang.hm> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Kathy Giori wrote:
>>>
>>>> From a PR perspective, I strongly suggest keeping the term OpenWrt as
>>>> part of the branding of the project moving forward. It can just be
>>>> cosmetic (web site, etc.) but the name has so much history, and
>>>> positive connotation, that you don't want to lose that brand attached
>>>> to the development moving forward.
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree, I think this is an obvious choice to make. OpenWRT has a lot of
>>> name recognition, it would be foolish to throw that away.
>>
>> Just to take the other side for rhetorical purposes, a purpose of a
>> re-branding exercise is to show a change in the "product" or
>> organisation behind it. OpenWrt is widely known... as a bleeding edge,
>> sometimes unstable, somewhat hard to use 3rd party firmware. DD-Wrt
>> and Tomato get a lot more press for some reason. So do things like
>> Yocto. If lede were to succeed in meeting its other goals, coherently,
>> preserving "lede" and moving forward as a separate project does make
>> sense.
> 
> I'll point out OpenOffice vs LibreOffice and the fact that years after
> development of OO has really stopped, people are still finding it and
> downloading it instead of LO (it's replacement)
> 
> there's a lot of stuff out there pointing at OpenWRT, unless you are
> going to replace all the OpenWRT stuff with pointers to LEDE, you are
> better off taking advantage of the millions of references to OpenWRT.
> 
> David Lang
> 
> Yes, the name is pointing at a product that doesn't exist any longer,
> but Deb and Ian aren't involved with Debian any longer either. At some
> point the fact that a name is known matters far more than the historical
> reasons for the name.

a problem that can be solved by a http redirect ...

	John