I agree with Bertrand and having a links to a mailing list thread and Github issue helps the next time someone requests to the (P)PMC to review a proposal to use the mark
- Carlos Santana @csantanapr > On Mar 7, 2019, at 5:15 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi, > >> On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 6:19 PM Matt Rutkowski <[email protected]> wrote: >> ...In my experience, they get very agitated when Apache project names are >> used outside of Apache owned contexts.... > > It shouldn't be "they" - this (P)PMC should be careful about how its > marks are used, in order to demonstrate that it's protecting them > actively. > > Failure to do so might make it much harder to fight violations should > they appear...being unable to challenge someone using the OpenWhisk > name in a confusing and possibly damaging way would be bad. > > An obvious example nowadays is someone distributing a Docker image or > other binary named "OpenWhisk" and doing bad things...protecting our > marks means making sure such things cannot be confused with this > project's releases. > > The (P)PMC just needs to clearly define how its marks can be used, > based on the ASF recommendations, and collecting examples like > Rodric's is good for that. > > -Bertrand
