couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikeal Rogers <>
Subject Re: Couchbase trademark issues
Date Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:32:32 GMT
This is why there is confusion:

What is CouchDB?

I challenge two people to come up with a consistent answer between them without collusion


On Feb 20, 2012, at February 20, 20122:15 PM, James Hayton wrote:

> I disagree regarding the source of the confusion.  Sure, there is stuff that Apache CouchDB
can do better as you mention, but I think the source of the problem is that there are two
different products with Couch in their name, where one, CouchBase, used to ship the other,
CouchDB, but now they don't.  I am getting confused just typing this :)
> Mongo has a bunch of companies with mongo in the name (hosting, etc), but it doesn't
confuse anyone since its all about one product, (mongodb).
> CouchBase screwed up here IMHO.  If they no longer wanted to be involved with CouchDB
when the merger happened they should have chosen a name that didn't include the word couch.
 Now with that being said, as a user of CouchDB I am very appreciative of everything the CouchOne
guys did for the project and I was upset to see them go in a different direction after the
merger.  I don't think they planned on redirecting their interests elsewhere when they merged
so I can understand what happened here. It doesn't really matter.  It has happened and the
Apache CouchDB project needs to do what it can to fix it for the sake of the project.
> This is very real problem that won't go away easily.  I dont think better descriptions
are going to solve the problem, but that is an option.  Legally going after CouchBase would
not be how I would handle it either.  Those guys did a ton for this project and I think that
they would even admit they screwed up in hindsight now that they are no longer developing/supporting
CouchDB or even an API compatible product.  
> The only other real option is rebranding Apache CouchDB, which is radical and unlikely
to happen, but it's an option that might be better than the other two options.
> To summarize, there are really only 3 options:
> 1) CouchBase Changes Their Name Either Because They Want To Or Us Pushing The Issue.
> 2) Apache CouchDB Rebrands
> 3) Explain The Differences Better On Both Sides 
> Which one we go with I really don't care.  I just care about this project and want it
to thrive, gain new users/interests, etc... so that it will still be around in 10 years.
> What I would like to see is Apache CouchDB get 1.2 put the door and then work hard on
getting some cool features added to coincide with a complete rebranding:
> Features Such As
> - Clustering/BigCouch
> - In Memory Couch Add On With Compatible API ( I dunno just throwing stuff out there.
) Allow Me To Have High Performance Option That I Can Replicate To Disk Later
> - Auto Compaction 
> - Querying With Start & End keys for posted queries
> - Multiple linked docs per view row
> - Modularize the code base 
> - Many other things I have in my head :)
> Add all that to existing CouchDB, call it KillerDB, AwesomeDB, whatever and then get
back to relaxing :)
> Again, just my thoughts.  Just trying to get the wheels churning on alternatives to getting
in some spat with CouchBase, continuing to confuse everyone, etc...
> James
> On Feb 20, 2012, at 12:34 PM, Mikeal Rogers <> wrote:
>> Confusion over what CouchDB is has more to do with a lack of clarity on the website
and conveyed by the project itself than anything Cloudant, CouchBase, or any other company
has done building products around it.
>> Renaming it does not solve this, it just creates a new name/entity people understand
even less.
>> Until not that long ago this was on the website as some form of architecture explanation:
>> A great visualization if you already know what CouchDB is but only confusing if you
>> -Mikeal
>> On Feb 20, 2012, at February 20, 201210:46 AM, James Hayton wrote:
>>> Maybe a crazy idea, but since the end result of any legal stuff would be
>>> somebody changing the name of something, why doesn't Apache CouchDB just re
>>> brand itself?  I mean we need a website makeover, etc...  Why don't we just
>>> ditch the name and come up with something better with a new vision, new
>>> leadership, etc...  Lets put a few features in that people have been asking
>>> for, include the big couch code (clustering), create a new website and call
>>> it something different.  (CouchDB 2.0 Becomes AwesomeDB lol)
>>> I understand that alot of people have quite a bit invested in the name
>>> CouchDB, at this may not be something realistic, but this just seems like
>>> at least another option we should discuss.
>>> Just my .02.
>>> James

View raw message