Superb. In the spirit of doing, I just sent a note to trademarks@ to
clarify the above plan, ask if we should do a namesearch (or similar
task), and if any of them had other suggestions.

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 9:00 PM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 to “Apache Avatica” with disclaimer "Apache Avatica is governed by the 
> Apache Calcite PMC”.
>
> If we are agreed, I think one of us should run this past branding. There 
> might be a branding policy for sub-projects that we don’t know about. Maybe 
> they’ll want us to do a name search. I’ll take that on if no one else would 
> like to.
>
> Julian
>
>
>> On Apr 3, 2017, at 7:40 AM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> 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
>>  
>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/42596e452b1620202e03bb5735eea12afc383a07cf3a3779e5605992@%3Ctrademarks.apache.org%3E>
>> [2] https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs#naming 
>> <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>
>>>  
>>> <https://github.com/knq/usql#database-support<https://github.com/knq/usql#database-support>>

Reply via email to