drill-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@dremio.com>
Subject Re: Naming the new ValueVector Initiative
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2015 17:29:09 GMT
I think we can call the voting closed. Top vote getters:

Apache Arrow (17)
Apache Herringbone (9)
Apache Joist (8)
Apache Colbuf (8)

I'll up a PODLINGNAMESEARCH-* shortly for Arrow.

--
Jacques Nadeau
CTO and Co-Founder, Dremio

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Marcel Kornacker <marcel@cloudera.com>
wrote:

> Just added my vote.
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Wes McKinney <wes@cloudera.com> wrote:
> > Shall we call the voting closed? Any last stragglers?
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Apache can handle this if we set the groundwork in place.
> >>
> >> Also, Twitter's lawyers work for Twitter, not for Apache. As such, their
> >> opinions can't be taken by Apache as legal advice.  There are issues of
> >> privilege, conflict of interest and so on.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Alex Levenson <alexlevenson@twitter.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 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