Nathan, I was not actually defining people like you and me (consulting and implementing using ACS based technologies) as customers. Because we are not the ones using OpenACS in the end, we are providing and recommending it for our clients. On the other hand, I think our group is the one who can have a deep inpact on the distribution of OpenACS. Should we define Consultants as a seperate group? Probably yes, but why? I see consultants as the extended opinion of the customers. At least that's the way it should be (IMHO). Though I've to agree that I think a lot about how I could convince my friends and their seniors at accenture or PWC to have a look at (Open)AC(E)S to supplement Lotus Notes installations or even go with OpenACS instead of Notes. In that regard I realized it is necessary to give them an easy way to look at the system, like a demo site. And give figures how long it takes to implement a site running with OpenACS. How far it can scale, what are further advantages over the proven concepts. As licence fee does not count for their customers in comparison to the rates they bill per hour the only thing which could convince is the ease of setup of a site and the quick learning curve how to adapt OpenACS.
Coming back to the original question, if we want to see consultants seperate from their clients {and I don't want to make a definitive judgement on this), we should add them as a fourth group. But will the requirements be that much different in comparison to what we need to do in regards to marketing for clients. I doubt it, but I'd love to hear more from consultants like you, jerry and michael, or implementors like janine, ben or tally {don't feel yourself stepped on your toes when I put you in the wrong category or not both).
