incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Malone <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Dataflow Incubator Proposal
Date Wed, 20 Jan 2016 23:30:25 GMT
> I don't see anything in the proposal about Google ceasing the use of the
> brand
> "Google Cloud Dataflow".  Yet the co-existence of "Google Cloud Dataflow"
> and
> "Apache Dataflow" would conflict with Apache requirements for vendor
> neutrality and project independence.
> The issue seems similar to the recent proposal to incubate "Apache
> OpenMiracl"
> while allowing the "Miracl" company to continue distribution of the
> "Miracl"
> project.  That situation was was resolved by renaming the Apache project to
> "Milagro", allowing the Miracl company to continue benefitting from the
> brand
> they had invested in so heavily.

Apologies to my delay responding to the feedback about naming!

We anticipated there may be some concerns about the naming. The project
members also want to confront those concerns head-on so any issues related
to naming don't take away from the technical merit of the proposal. We're
open to coming up with a new name and renaming the proposed project if it's
prudent or required. To that end, I have a question about the order of

If we need to rename, we would ideally choose a new name, change the
project name at that time, and start our refactoring with that new name. Is
is acceptable for us to flag a name change as something we need to do as a
near-term (1st month) item in incubation (if accepted)? If a rename is
required I'd like to add it to our to-do roadmap but also not block our
proposal on a renaming. I ask so we can address this concern in the best
way possible.

> Marvin Humphrey
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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