The term redskin is derogatory which is clearly not the same as arrow. I think if our logo is not a native American arrow there is no real issue. On Dec 1, 2015 12:32 AM, "Julian Hyde" <jh...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1 to have a vote tomorrow. > > Assuming that Vector is out of play, I just did a quick search for the top > 4 remaining, (“arrow”, “honeycomb”, “herringbone”, “joist"), at > sourceforge, open hub, trademarkia, and on google. There are no trademarks > for these in similar subject areas. There is a moderately active project > called “joist” [1]. > > I will point out that “Apache Arrow” has native-american connotations that > we may or may not want to live with (just ask the Washington Redskins how > they feel about their name). > > If someone would like to vet other names, use the links on > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90, and fill out > column C in the spreadsheet. > > Julian > > [1] https://github.com/stephenh/joist > > > On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:01 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> wrote: > > +1 > > -- > Jacques Nadeau > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Wes McKinney <w...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > Should we have a last call for votes, closing EOD tomorrow (Tuesday)? I > missed this for a few days last week with holiday travel. > > On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Julian Hyde <jul...@hydromatic.net> > wrote: > > Consulting a lawyer is part of the Apache branding process but the first > stage is to gather a list of potential conflicts - > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90 is an example. > > The other part, frankly, is to pick your battles. > > A year or so ago Actian re-branded Vectorwise as Vector. > http://www.zdnet.com/article/actian-consolidates-its-analytics-portfolio/. > Given that it is an analytic database in the Hadoop space I think that is > as close to a “direct hit” as it gets. I don’t think we need a lawyer to > tell us that. Certainly it makes sense to look for conflicts for the other > alternatives before consulting lawyers. > > Julian > > > > > On Nov 25, 2015, at 9:42 PM, Marcel Kornacker <mar...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> > wrote: > > Ok guys, > > I don't think anyone is doing a thorough analysis of viaability. I did a > quick glance and the top one (Vector) seems like it would have an issue > with conflict of an Actian product. The may be fine. Let's do a second > phase vote. > > > I'm assuming you mean Vectorwise? > > Before we do anything else, could we have a lawyer look into this? Last > time around that I remember (Parquet), Twitter's lawyers did a good job of > weeding out the potential trademark violations. > > Alex, could Twitter get involved this time around as well? > > > > Pick your top 3 (1,2,3 with 3 being top preference) > > Let's get this done by Friday and then we can do a podling name search > starting with the top one. > > Link again: > > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532&vpid=A1 > > thanks > > > -- > Jacques Nadeau > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio > > On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> > wrote: > > Ok, it looks like we have a candidate list (we actually got 11 since > there was a three-way tie for ninth place): > > VectorArrowhoneycombHerringbonejoistV2Pietcolbufbatonimpulsevictor > Next we need to do trademark searches on each of these to see whether > we're likely to have success. I've moved candidates to a second tab: > > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532 > > Anybody want to give a hand in analyzing potential conflicts? > > > > -- > Jacques Nadeau > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> > wrote: > > Everybody should pick their ten favorites using the numbers 1 to 10. > > 10 is most preferred > > > > -- > Jacques Nadeau > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio > > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Single vote for most preferred? > > Single transferable vote? > > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com> > wrote: > > Given that a bunch of people added names to the sheet, I'll take > that as tacit agreement to the proposed process. > > Let's move to the first vote phase. I've added a column for > everybody's votes. Let's try to wrap up the vote by 10am on Wednesday. > > thanks! > Jacques > > > > -- > Jacques Nadeau > CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio > > On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org > > wrote: > > > Hey Guys, > > It sounds like we need to do a little more work on the Vector > proposal > before the board would like to consider it. The main point of > contention > right now is the name of the project. We need to decide on a name > and get > it signed off through PODLINGNAMESEARCH. > > Naming is extremely subjective so I'd like to propose a process for > selection that minimizes pain. This is an initial proposal and > > We do the naming in the following steps > - 1: Collect a set of names to be considered > - 2: Run a vote for 2 days where each member ranks their top 10 > options > 1..10 > - 3: Take the top ten vote getters and do a basic analysis of > whether we > think that any have legal issues. Keep dropping names that have > this until > we get with 10 reasonably solid candidate names > - 5: Take the top ten names and give people 48 hours to rank their > top 3 > names > - 6: Start a PODLINGNAMESEARCH on the top rank one, if that doesn't > work, > try the second and third options. > > I suggest we take name suggestions for step 1 from everyone but then > constrain the voting to the newly proposed project [1]. We could > just do > this in a private email thread but I think doing it on Drill dev is > better > in the interest of transparency. This isn't the perfect place for > that but > I'm not sure a better place exists. > > I'm up for changing any or all of this depending on what others > think. Just > wanted to get the ball rolling on a proposed process. > > If this works, I've posted a doc at [2] that we can use for step 1. > > Thanks, > Jacques > > [1] List of proposed new project members/voters: Todd Lipcon, Ted > Dunning, > Michael Stack, P. Taylor Goetz, Julian Hyde, Julien Le Dem, Jacques > Nadeau, > James Taylor, Jake Luciani, Parth Chandra, Alex Levenson, Marcel > Kornacker, > Steven Phillips, Hanifi Gunes, Wes McKinney, Jason Altekruse, David > Alves, > Zain Asgar, Ippokratis Pandis, Abdel Hakim Deneche, Reynold Xin. > [2] > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=0 > > > > > > > > > > > >
