OK so I changed the reference in the README and the docs as you requested. Please let me know if that is sufficient or if you need me to change it everywhere the word tinkerpop is used (including phrases like "Tinkerpop3"
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Jeffrey Freeman < jeffrey.free...@syncleus.com> wrote: > One question. In some places i reference the specific version as > "Tinkerpop3" can those references remain as-is, if they are to be reworded > whats the proper format for those? > > On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Jeffrey Freeman < > jeffrey.free...@syncleus.com> wrote: > >> Happy to make those changed. If I understand you correct the issue is >> just with naming "Tinkerpop" to "Apache TinkerPop™" to make the >> trademark more clear? I'm happy to do that, assuming markdown can support >> the tm mark, if not ill add it as (tm). >> >> On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 from me - pending some fixes in initial references to "TinkerPop" in >>> Ferma README and web site/docs to become "Apache TinkerPop™". Other than >>> that it looks good to me. >>> >>> We'll give this 72 hours to see if anyone else has comments - assuming no >>> objections we can get Ferma into the listing after that. Thanks for your >>> continued contribution in this area. >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Jeffrey Freeman < >>> jeffrey.free...@syncleus.com> wrote: >>> >>> > Ferma should be listed in the "Community Contributions" section of the >>> main >>> > tinkerpop3 apache site ( http://tinkerpop.apache.org ) >>> > >>> > Their project/github link: https://github.com/Syncleus/Ferma >>> > Their website and documentation: http://syncleus.com/Ferma >>> > >>> > They meet all requirements in the policy document ( >>> > http://tinkerpop.apache.org/policy.html ) including full support for >>> > Tinkerpop3, their own website, many releases, and documentation. >>> > >>> > I've also created the following ticket to help speed this along: >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1794 >>> > >>> > (FYI I know i sent a similar email earlier, this new e-mail is in a >>> format >>> > as suggested from a member of the community in that thread) >>> > >>> >> >> >
