To be clear, when I wrote "I worked with", it doesn't mean we're colleagues. But I work with other initial committers in the community.
tison <wander4...@gmail.com>于2023年11月28日 周二19:15写道： > Thanks for your reply, Justin. Now I understand your concern more > concretely. > > I'll share three points here: > > 1. First of all, the trademark policy must be followed for the new > PPMC. The PPMC will protect the trademark with the guide of trademark > policy[1][2]. It's part of the road during the incubation. > > 2. I worked with the people for a while, and I trust their motivation > for running a diverse community. It's impossible to prove, but we can > do a few exercises as your new reply. > > > whereas “CeresDB” should be used in several cases > > **This is a concern. I'll check it with the initial group, resolve it, > and then go back to the list. I hope this is a signal that the project > is actively reacting to this concern,**[3] > > ... although I may regard it as a post-donate action (Answer Cloud is > removed after entering the incubator[4]. I did it, followed by some > others from Answer's committers). > > > some entities have taken unfair advantage of this > > It's also unfair to judge a new incubator proposal to assume, in > advance, that they will do something evil. > > Best, > tison. > > [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/ > [2] https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/policies > [3] https://github.com/CeresDB/horaedb/issues/1319 > [4] > https://github.com/apache/incubator-answer-website/commit/e807a7af5e48b3dfb505854f029753daf480362f > > Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> 于2023年11月28日周二 18:27写道： > > > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:12 PM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > We need to know the reasons for the name change and why the company is > willing to donate the code but not the name. The possibility of having them > forking the community later is a risk the Incubator needs to know about and > should be mentioned in the proposal. Having a brand closely associated with > a project and owned by a single corporate entity is a risk to the project. > Why a company would be unwilling to give up that brand or trademark just > because it may be convenient in the future is a concern. > > > > While I agree that having a clear reason stated would be helpful, I > > think I have a different take on the risks you are outlining here. > > > > We have tons of examples here in the ASF of project Foo being used to > > power commercial product Bar (Geode/Gemfire, Ignite/GridGain, > > Kafka/Confluent, and many, many more). So this kind of dual branding > > is nothing new -- there's no community fork involved per se. > > > > It would be nice if the original name of the open source project (as > > it existed on Github) was donated to ASF and the new name for a > > commercially developed product was picked. But even if it is the other > > way around -- I actually don't see any risks for the foundation in > > this approach (as long as it is clearly understood that the branding > > guidelines on both sides need to be honored). > > > > Thanks, > > Roman. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > >
