drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Levenson <alexleven...@twitter.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: Naming the new ValueVector Initiative
Date Tue, 01 Dec 2015 20:51:57 GMT
I can ask about whether Twitter's lawyers can help out -- is that something
we need? Or is that something apache helps out with in the next step?

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Julian Hyde <jhyde@apache.org> wrote:

> +1 to have a vote tomorrow.
>
> Assuming that Vector is out of play, I just did a quick search for the top
> 4 remaining, (“arrow”, “honeycomb”, “herringbone”, “joist"), at
> sourceforge, open hub, trademarkia, and on google. There are no trademarks
> for these in similar subject areas. There is a moderately active project
> called “joist” [1].
>
> I will point out that “Apache Arrow” has native-american connotations that
> we may or may not want to live with (just ask the Washington Redskins how
> they feel about their name).
>
> If someone would like to vet other names, use the links on
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90, and fill out
> column C in the spreadsheet.
>
> Julian
>
> [1] https://github.com/stephenh/joist
>
>
> On Nov 30, 2015, at 7:01 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com> wrote:
>
> +1
>
> --
> Jacques Nadeau
> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Wes McKinney <wes@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> Should we have a last call for votes, closing EOD tomorrow (Tuesday)? I
> missed this for a few days last week with holiday travel.
>
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Julian Hyde <julian@hydromatic.net>
> wrote:
>
> Consulting a lawyer is part of the Apache branding process but the first
> stage is to gather a list of potential conflicts -
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-90 is an example.
>
> The other part, frankly, is to pick your battles.
>
> A year or so ago Actian re-branded Vectorwise as Vector.
> http://www.zdnet.com/article/actian-consolidates-its-analytics-portfolio/.
> Given that it is an analytic database in the Hadoop space I think that is
> as close to a “direct hit” as it gets. I don’t think we need a lawyer to
> tell us that. Certainly it makes sense to look for conflicts for the other
> alternatives before consulting lawyers.
>
> Julian
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 25, 2015, at 9:42 PM, Marcel Kornacker <marcel@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com>
> wrote:
>
> Ok guys,
>
> I don't think anyone is doing a thorough analysis of viaability. I did a
> quick glance and the top one (Vector) seems like it would have an issue
> with conflict of an Actian product. The may be fine. Let's do a second
> phase vote.
>
>
> I'm assuming you mean Vectorwise?
>
> Before we do anything else, could we have a lawyer look into this? Last
> time around that I remember (Parquet), Twitter's lawyers did a good job of
> weeding out the potential trademark violations.
>
> Alex, could Twitter get involved this time around as well?
>
>
>
> Pick your top 3 (1,2,3 with 3 being top preference)
>
> Let's get this done by Friday and then we can do a podling name search
> starting with the top one.
>
> Link again:
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532&vpid=A1
>
> thanks
>
>
> --
> Jacques Nadeau
> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com>
> wrote:
>
> Ok, it looks like we have a candidate list (we actually got 11 since
> there was a three-way tie for ninth place):
>
> VectorArrowhoneycombHerringbonejoistV2Pietcolbufbatonimpulsevictor
> Next we need to do trademark searches on each of these to see whether
> we're likely to have success. I've moved candidates to a second tab:
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=304381532
>
> Anybody want to give a hand in analyzing potential conflicts?
>
>
>
> --
> Jacques Nadeau
> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com>
> wrote:
>
> Everybody should pick their ten favorites using the numbers 1 to 10.
>
> 10 is most preferred
>
>
>
> --
> Jacques Nadeau
> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
>
> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Single vote for most preferred?
>
> Single transferable vote?
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 2:50 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@dremio.com>
> wrote:
>
> Given that a bunch of people added names to the sheet, I'll take
> that as tacit agreement to the proposed process.
>
> Let's move to the first vote phase. I've added a column for
> everybody's votes. Let's try to wrap up the vote by 10am on Wednesday.
>
> thanks!
> Jacques
>
>
>
> --
> Jacques Nadeau
> CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio
>
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Jacques Nadeau <jacques@apache.org
>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> It sounds like we need to do a little more work on the Vector
> proposal
> before the board would like to consider it. The main point of
> contention
> right now is the name of the project. We need to decide on a name
> and get
> it signed off through PODLINGNAMESEARCH.
>
> Naming is extremely subjective so I'd like to propose a process for
> selection that minimizes pain. This is an initial proposal and
>
> We do the naming in the following steps
> - 1: Collect a set of names to be considered
> - 2: Run a vote for 2 days where each member ranks their top 10
> options
> 1..10
> - 3: Take the top ten vote getters and do a basic analysis of
> whether we
> think that any have legal issues. Keep dropping names that have
> this until
> we get with 10 reasonably solid candidate names
> - 5: Take the top ten names and give people 48 hours to rank their
> top 3
> names
> - 6: Start a PODLINGNAMESEARCH on the top rank one, if that doesn't
> work,
> try the second and third options.
>
> I suggest we take name suggestions for step 1 from everyone but then
> constrain the voting to the newly proposed project [1]. We could
> just do
> this in a private email thread but I think doing it on Drill dev is
> better
> in the interest of transparency. This isn't the perfect place for
> that but
> I'm not sure a better place exists.
>
> I'm up for changing any or all of this depending on what others
> think. Just
> wanted to get the ball rolling on a proposed process.
>
> If this works, I've posted a doc at [2] that we can use for step 1.
>
> Thanks,
> Jacques
>
> [1] List of proposed new project members/voters: Todd Lipcon, Ted
> Dunning,
> Michael Stack, P. Taylor Goetz, Julian Hyde, Julien Le Dem, Jacques
> Nadeau,
> James Taylor, Jake Luciani, Parth Chandra, Alex Levenson, Marcel
> Kornacker,
> Steven Phillips, Hanifi Gunes, Wes McKinney, Jason Altekruse, David
> Alves,
> Zain Asgar, Ippokratis Pandis, Abdel Hakim Deneche, Reynold Xin.
> [2]
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q6UqluW6SLuMKRwW2TBGBzHfYLlXYm37eKJlIxWQGQM/edit#gid=0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Alex Levenson
@THISWILLWORK

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message