I would omit 'apache' just because that's what I see other Apache projects do. You're right that legal mentioned it would be best in this instance to show use of "Flink" alone as a trademark, and this helps that goal, although I think it's possible to achieve this otherwise. Yes in general though referring to "Apache Flink" is desirable.
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Alan Gates <[email protected]> wrote: > I am not aware of any requirement that the jar have apache in the name. > > Alan. > > Ufuk Celebi <[email protected]> > August 8, 2014 at 1:39 AM > > I've changed my opinion. > > I thought about this further and think we should stick to the version > *without* the prefix. The legal team asked for a release without the Apache > prefix and most of the other projects don't do it either. > > Do any of the mentors have input on this? > >
