community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <>
Subject Re: Apache Extras Question
Date Thu, 29 Dec 2011 21:08:49 GMT
Hey Christian,

On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:49 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> [...snip...]
>> To avoid that nuclear option, I proposed 2 concrete suggestions and even volunteered
>> to work up a patch that implements the one with less sweeping change. IOW, I
>> offered to put my money where my mouth was and do the work to update the docs.
>> Sound good?
> For me yes, but I am just a lurker on this list. But are you sure this
> issue is apache-extras related? It boils down to: are other people
> allowed to use the org.apache namespace or not.

Yeah I know there is a larger question here -- one in which I'm trying
to avoid b/c I'm simply trying to solve my smaller question :-)

> Maybe this is
> trademark related? If others are not allowed, then many projects must
> rename their spaces. if others are allowed, then there can not be such
> a policy as "do not use org.a namespace" for apache-extras.

My guess is that the ASF has neither the resources, nor the energy, 
nor the time to desire to police everyone's forks of Apache projects
on Github, etc., that leverage the org.apache.* namespace (which there
are plenty, even enabled by the ASF's own mirroring of our project's 
at Github). By precedent, I'm inclined to agree with you and state that
we already allow this. I could have just gone about my business, given
this assumption, but I came to this list to try and be a good ASF citizen
and member and state that I think stuff like this should be find.

And further, I'm going to state that I didn't go to Github first, which is 
*totally* not associated with the ASF at all. I went to our supposed
"Extras" site which I'm learning is not that at all. 

I'd like to make it "that" however and stated 2 proposals for getting there.
I'm inclined to go with my 2nd proposal, and simply update the docs
on the FAQ to state that if the PMC is OK with a situation that is outside of
3.1 and 3.2, then there should be a VOTE/recorded result on the 
mailing list by the PMC, and then that's an exception (documented)
to the standard rule.

> Probably you should include Shane too?

CC'ing trademarks and pointing them to [1] for the full conversation



Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Senior Computer Scientist
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA

View raw message