Actually, my understanding is that "Apache Avatica" is OK/preferred.
I've similarly struggled on what name to use; it's probably a good time
to just bite the bullet and get some consensus :)
For those with the ability to read trademarks@, there is [1]
For those without, the gist of it can be understood from [2]. In our
case "Avatica" is a product name and that document should be read with
"product name" being interchangeable with "project name". In other
words: "Apache Avatica" is the proper name (even though no such TLP exists).
I think the full "disclaimer" (Apache Avatica is governed by the Apache
Calcite PMC etc, etc) would be good to display prominently on
calcite.a.o/avatica. Perhaps I can push something together today :)
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/42596e452b1620202e03bb5735eea12afc383a07cf3a3779e5605992@%3Ctrademarks.apache.org%3E
[2] https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs#naming
Julian Hyde wrote:
(This is a discussion for the Calcite PMC, but I am using the dev list because
there is no need for the conversation to be private.)
Avatica is currently just a library produced by the Apache Calcite project, not
even formally a sub-project (some examples of sub-projects are Derby within
Apache DB, and Solr within Lucene, but sub-projects are now discouraged).
So, I’m not sure whether it is appropriate to brand it “Apache Avatica” as I
just saw on one site[1].
A reminder that it is our responsibility, as a PMC, to protect Apache's
intellectual property by enforcing brands. We need to know what our brands are,
then we need to reach out to people who are referencing our brands and make
sure that they use them appropriately.
I am inclined to think that we should use “Avatica, a sub-project of Apache
Calcite”. Or should we start pushing for “Apache Avatica”?
Julian
[1]
https://github.com/knq/usql#database-support<https://github.com/knq/usql#database-support>
