Great, thanks for taking some time looking at this! If nobody objects in the next 48 hours, I'll open a PR for the TPC-H data generator.
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yeah, I believe it should be ok since we do not actually package any > code bits from TPC-H. > > I think giving trademark nudge to TPC-H in our NOTICE file should be good. > > - Henry > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > wrote: > > I've send a message to admin-i...@tpc.org and never got an answer. (on > > http://www.tpc.org/trademarks/ they list ad...@tpc.org as the right > > address, but sending a message to admin@ redirects to admin-info@.) > > > > My code doesn't contain any TPC data or code. Its a Java > re-implementation > > of the C data generator. The only thing it does is using the name "TPC". > It > > also tries to generate the same data as the official generator, but we > > don't claim that. > > > > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Henry Saputra <henry.sapu...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Robert, > >> > >> Just curious if you did try to send email to tpc.org to ask about fair > >> usage of example data? > >> > >> > >> - Henry > >> > >> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > I tried twice writing them but I didn't receive an answer. > >> > But given that Apache Calcite is also using airlift/tpch in its > >> > dependencies as well, I would like to add the TPC-H data generator to > >> > "flink-contrib". > >> > I would also add a note that TPC is a registered trademark and that > our > >> > generator is not the official generator and may not be used to > generate > >> > test data for performance measurement publications. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> I wrote them some time ago (like 12+ months) about the question > whether > >> we > >> >> can include TPCH sample data for our programs. They replied they were > >> just > >> >> revising their license to allow that. > >> >> > >> >> Should be possible now. Good idea to ping them again to make sure > that > >> it > >> >> is approved now and that it holds for code as well... > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org > > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > Okay, thank you. I'll write a mail to tpc.org and ask which rules > we > >> >> have > >> >> > to respect. > >> >> > > >> >> > On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Fabian Hueske <fhue...@gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > +1 for reaching out to the TPC. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > It might also be that it is OK to add the code but not under the > >> name > >> >> > > TPC-H. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > 2015-02-11 13:55 GMT+01:00 Ufuk Celebi <u...@apache.org>: > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Nice, this is a great tool. :) > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On 09 Feb 2015, at 17:05, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > However, the website is not really helpful: > >> >> > > > http://www.tpc.org/trademarks/ > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > As one data point, the Apache Calcite (incubating) project > also > >> >> > depends > >> >> > > > on > >> >> > > > > the mentioned airlift/tpch repository: > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/blob/master/plus/pom.xml#L57 > >> >> > > > > and > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-calcite/blob/master/plus/src/main/java/org/apache/calcite/adapter/tpch/TpchSchema.java#L33 > >> >> > > > > . > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > How about adding a line to the NOTICE files acknowledging > that > >> TPC > >> >> > is a > >> >> > > > > registered trademark of the transaction processing council? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > I find it reasonable to add it to the NOTICE files as an > >> >> > acknowledgement. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > The trademark website says "For additional details please > contact > >> >> > > > ad...@tpc.org." If we want to be on the safe side, we could > >> write an > >> >> > > > email and confirm. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Any further opinions on this? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > – Ufuk > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >
