www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>
Subject Re: artifactIds and "apache-" prefix for trademark-enabled artifacts
Date Wed, 16 May 2007 10:26:30 GMT
On May 16, 2007, at 2:19 AM, Stefano Bagnara wrote:
>> IMO, there is no reason to prefix each and every artifact's filename
>> produce by an ASF project with "apache-"... assembly zip/tgz okay,
>> maybe... but for other Maven artifacts I belive that the org.apache
>> groupId should be sufficient.
>
> IMHO is not about your opinion or my opinion, it is about what ASF
> lawyers can do to prevent others to distribute "fake" versions of our
> products.

Sure ;-)


> One of the tools ASF can use is the trademark law and to do that we  
> have
> to use "apache" in the file name.
>
> Why should Maven artifacts follow a different procedure that other
> redistributable packages? As maven repositories do redistribute
> artifacts it would really help to have this apache prefix. ActiveMQ  
> just
> followed this practice (apache-activemq in the artifactId)

The ActiveMQ folks have updated their build to generate assembly (zip  
and tar.gz) artifact filename prefixed with "apache-", but *most* of  
the Maven generated artifacts for the project are not prefixed with  
"apache-":

     http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/activemq/

Instead they are prefixed with "activemq-" and contained with in the  
org.apache.activemq group.

What I read into the email was that "apache-" needs to be on each and  
every redistributed file, which turns this list:

     activemq-console/
     activemq-core/
     activemq-jaas/
     activemq-openwire-generator/
     activemq-optional/
     activemq-parent/
     activemq-ra/
     activemq-rar/
     activemq-test-atomikos/
     activemq-web-console/
     activemq-web-demo/
     activemq-web/
     activemq-xmpp/
     apache-activemq/
     tooling/

into:

     apache-activemq-console/
     apache-activemq-core/
     apache-activemq-jaas/
     apache-activemq-openwire-generator/
     apache-activemq-optional/
     apache-activemq-parent/
     apache-activemq-ra/
     apache-activemq-rar/
     apache-activemq-test-atomikos/
     apache-activemq-web-console/
     apache-activemq-web-demo/
     apache-activemq-web/
     apache-activemq-xmpp/
     apache-activemq/
     apache-tooling/

(I'm not even going to try and show the before/after for Apache  
Geronimo... but just a note, right now there are 277 modules in  
server/trunk.  Most have artifactId's prefixed with "geronimo-",  
though most config modules don't have any prefix at all).

Since each of these dirs represents an artifact, or in some cases a  
set of artifacts... and each and every one of them have an POM  
artifact, that pretty much means adding "apache-" to each and every  
ASF projects modules (er artifactIds) using Maven or Maven2.

I'm all for protecting things... but if that means putting "apache-"  
in-front of everything... then I'm not sure how well that is going to  
fly with the rest of the community.

I personally believe that Maven artifacts should be considered  
different than project release archives.

We already put META-INF/LICENSE.txt and META-INF/NOTICE.txt (and in  
some cases META-INF/DISCLAIMER.txt) into each and every jar/zip/tgz  
artifact.... isn't that sufficient to protect the artifact and its  
contents?

--jason


> Our to be
> released Mime4J has just been updated to artifactId=apache-mime4j. If
> maven or the repository does not give us another option I think the  
> only
> option we (we: PMC wanting to team with ASF in order to protect our
> rights) have is to change all of our artifactIds. I don't like this  
> too
> much, but if we don't have any better technical solution to this  
> policy
> advice I will do that (and I hope others PMC too).
>
> Btw, as I know ant/ivy/osgi/maven people is discussing repositories I
> just think this is an important advice from the ASF and I hope people
> will take this into consideration.
>
> We all already loose so much time discussing and managing
> NOTICE/LICENSE/headers/ICLA/CCLA/copyrights and whatever that it would
> be a pity if ASF could not defend our work because of a silly missing
> prefix.
>
> Stefano
>
> PS: if you are a lawyer then forget about what I wrote and please  
> get in
> touch with Robert because you have different convictions. I don't have
> the skills to evaluate the legal impact of using or not using the
> prefix, I'm just trying to find the best technical solution to a
> requirement.
>


Mime
View raw message