I also wanted to note that Yahoo legal and OSS department did conduct a rigorous validation process for the name, before open sourcing "Yahoo Pulsar" in Sept 2016.
Of course that won't guarantee anything, but the name wasn't decided without putting some thought on it. Matteo On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:19 PM Matteo Merli <matteo.me...@gmail.com> wrote: > In my view, even if there were a 100% chance to be forced to change name > in 4 years, it would still make sense to change it then, rather than now. > > Changing it now, would mean to effectively kill the project, under any > plausible scenarios. > > Matteo > > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:52 PM P. Taylor Goetz <ptgo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I’d suggest thinking long and hard about this. Would you rather deal with >> a name change now, or 4 years from now as a TLP? >> >> It may sound like a remote possibility, but trust me, these things can >> and do happen. >> >> -Taylor >> >> >> >> > On Jun 7, 2018, at 8:01 PM, Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> > As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending >> > tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task". >> > >> > A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar >> > name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141 >> > >> > I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response >> > from Mark Thomas. >> > >> >> Pulsar is a very popular name for software. >> >> >> >> I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name >> >> it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some. >> >> >> >> Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it >> >> is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE >> >> PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties. >> >> >> >> It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the >> >> future that would require the project to rename. >> >> >> >> The podling needs to make a choice. Either: >> >> >> >> a) continue using PULSAR and accept that: >> >> - there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used >> >> (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR) >> >> - it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project >> >> will be required to rename due to an infringement >> >> >> >> or >> >> >> >> b) pick a new name >> >> >> >> No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this. >> > >> > >> > Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter. >> > >> > My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and >> > have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF. >> > >> > My reasoning: >> > >> > * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar" >> > rather than just "Pulsar" >> > >> > * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be >> > very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building >> > some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention >> > the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package >> > names, etc. >> > >> > * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change >> > name at that point. Once the project has a larger community >> > and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to >> > restart from scratch. >> > >> > >> > I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once >> > there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a >> > final resolution on the subject. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Matteo >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Matteo Merli >> > <mme...@apache.org> >> > -- > Matteo Merli > <mme...@apache.org> > -- Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org>
