> Any particular reason? Well, I saw the new release, then the snapcraft release which reminded me of the other NetBeans 'forks' under, for example, Debian which still call themselves NetBeans although they are not released by Apache. So I remembered we had a talk long ago about this.
>From a pure precedent view, if Debian is able to call their package NetBeans and (heavily) patch the codebase to fit their needs, others should be able to do the same. (Not to mention how distros patch or add/remove modules to Apache HTTPD, etc). In particular, if I just take NetBeans and slap AdoptOpenJDK to it, then I don't see under what interpretation Apache Legal or the NetBeans PMC should send a cease and desist. But this is just an example: a FAQ should perhaps clarify this. --emi On Sat, Nov 2, 2019 at 10:46 AM Neil C Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, 2 Nov 2019, 06:12 Emilian Bold, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I'm curious what the PMC stance on the NetBeans brand and trademark is > > these days. > > > > Any particular reason? > > I personally remain of the view that convenience binaries made by anyone > from our (unmodified) source releases should be allowed under nominative > fair use. That seems in line with the ASF FAQ linked earlier. Not sure > we've progressed any further on the issue though? > > Best wishes, > > Neil > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
