community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shane Curcuru <...@shanecurcuru.org>
Subject Re: Apache Extras Question
Date Sat, 14 Jan 2012 22:20:56 GMT
Neat, I took a mental vacation on this issue, and it's mostly done when 
I come back to the thread!

Trademarks and brand are primarily about the primary name of a product, 
not classnames or package names.  So unless your project is called 
org.apache.SuperThing on the home page, the package name is of much less 
importance in the trandmark world than what you do say on your 
homepage/download page - presumably "Get Apache SuperThing!".

Apache Extras projects must not use the name "Apache" in their branding; 
i.e. to describe their projects or products.  Similarly, they must not 
use the same name as an Apache project or product, without having a very 
clear separation, a'la the Powered By guidelines.

Apache Extras projects probably should be able to use the 
org.apacheextras.* package name; I think along with the rest of the 
Apache Extras site guidelines, that keeps a sufficient "distance" with 
their projects.

Apache Extras projects must not create their own org.apache.* package 
names for their own projects.  While this is not the same level of 
importance as the overall Extras SuperStuff primary brand name, it is 
still inappropriate for Apache Extras projects to create new 
org.apache.SuperStuff packages.

Apache Extras probably can have some *existing* org.apache.SuperThing 
packages in their source tree, *if* they come from the actual Apache 
SuperThing project itself.

The point here is that Extras projects should not create new 
org.apache.* packages: that would imply their new SuperStuff is an 
official Apache bit of code (which it isn't).  But if they happen to 
want to fork some of our org.apache.SuperThing code, and incorporate it 
into their SuperStuff product, that's generally OK.

Does that all make sense?

- Shane

Sorry for the delay, but I was really burnt out on policy issue thinking 
over the holidays.

On 2012-01-02 10:14 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote:
> Hey Nóirín et al.,
>
> Happy New Year! I've went ahead and updated my patch
> on COMDEV-65 [1] with information on the org.apacheextras
> namespace and with the suggestion to get further information
> from the responsible Project Management Committees and
> from ComDev PMC in general. I also changed Project Committees
> to Project Management Committees per Nóirín's advice.
>
> I also went ahead and (a) started a VOTE thread with the OODT
> PMC on the naming of oodt-pushpull-plugins at Apache Extras [2];
> and (b) updated the package names on [2] to match org.apacheextras.
>
> With that, I'm considering this matter closed.
>
> Thanks for the advice everyone and best wishes in the New Year.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COMDEV-65
> [2] http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/oodt-pushpull-plugins/
>
> On Dec 30, 2011, at 12:21 AM, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
>
>> Chris,
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>> <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>  wrote:
>>> Hey Guys,
>>>
>>> I was talking with Greg, and I think I'm OK with org.apacheextras as
>>> the namespace.
>>
>> Thanks for your patience :-) I wasn't trying to discount your
>> proposals, and I appreciate that you'd created a patch--I was just
>> trying to understand the reasons you disliked the org.apacheextras.*
>> proposal.
>>
>> If your conversation with Greg is easy to summarize, it might be worth
>> documenting why this proposal ended up being ok for you--but if you
>> just want to get back to writing code, that's fine too :-)
>>
>>> It sounds like Noirin thought that was cool and so did Mark S.
>>> Are folks here on ComDev cool with that namespace for our Extras
>>> projects? If so, I'll update my COMDEV-65 patch with docs stating that
>>> and document it and move forward.
>>
>> Tiny nit on the patch: we have project management committees, not
>> project committees :-) (Hey, at least I read it, right? :-))
>>
>>> I'm also of the mindset that the PMC should be the ones saying
>>> if they are OK with my oodt-pushpull-plugins Extras name and
>>> to me it should be fine if the PMC is OK with that. I can update
>>> the FAQ/guidelines to state that.
>>
>> My very vague recollection from when Apache Extras was booting up was
>> that we didn't want "official PMC-sanctioned projects" to have special
>> status there. I'd give this one a day or two to collect more input
>> before updating anything.
>>
>> Noirin
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
> WWW:   http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>


Mime
View raw message