It definitely sounds like careful consideration was given to the name. +1 (non-binding)
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Joe Percivall <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the clarification Joe and Bryan, and we appear to be on the same > page that "Apache NiFi Registry" is how it would be referred to. > > With that cleared up, I am a +1. > > Joe > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 1:01 PM, Pierre Villard < > [email protected] > > wrote: > > > +1 as well, that will be a very important piece of the ecosystem and > > looking forward its development! > > > > 2017-02-10 18:47 GMT+01:00 Joe Witt <[email protected]>: > > > > > The name 'registry' is insufficient but we're not creating 'Apache > > > Registry'. We're creating a subproject of 'Apache NiFi' which is a > > > TLP of the ASF. This subproject, just like 'MiNiFi' would properly be > > > referred to as 'Registry: a subproject of Apache NiFi' or 'Apache NiFi > > > Registry'. Apache NiFi Registry works out quite well to explain both > > > what it is an to be consistent with the marks. See here for an > > > example of this guidance from ASF naming/marks guidance [1]. > > > > > > I view this vote as actually being about the community decision to > > > create this subproject with the stated goals and in that perspective I > > > am a strong +1. I'm open to alternative names though I do think > > > "Apache NiFi Registry" is nice and descriptive. > > > > > > [1] https://www.apache.org/dev/project-names.html > > > > > > Thanks > > > Joe > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:32 PM, Bryan Bende <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Well using MiNiFi as an example... > > > > > > > > Website - "MiNiFi - A subproject of Apache NiFi" > > > > Git - "nifi-minifi.git" > > > > JIRA - "Apache NiFi MiNiFi" > > > > > > > > For Registry I was thinking... > > > > > > > > Website - "Registry - A subproject of Apache NiFi" > > > > Git - "nifi-registry.git" > > > > JIRA "Apache NiFi Registry" > > > > > > > > So I didn't think there was a case where it would be referred to as > > > > only "Apache Registry", but if sub-project names are trademarked on > > > > their own then I do agree we would likely have to call it "NiFi > > > > Registry". > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Joe Percivall < > [email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > >> I 100% agree with Mike and was actually in the process of writing a > > very > > > >> similar response. Just having "Registry" as the name will mean the > > > >> trademark will be "Apache Registry" and I don't think that conveys > the > > > >> specificity of the sub-project. I'd much prefer something like NiFi > > > >> Registry like the initial discussion had. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Joe > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Michael Moser <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> I am in favor of the concept but the name made me pause. I did a > > > Google > > > >>> search of "apache registry" and found an existing Perl module > called > > > >>> Apache::Registry. Should I be worried about potential naming > > > confusion? > > > >>> > > > >>> -- Mike > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Oleg Zhurakousky < > > > >>> [email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> > +1 Here as well. We desperately need it. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > On Feb 10, 2017, at 12:11 PM, Jeremy Dyer <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > +1 non-binding. I like the separation and I see a lot of need > for > > > this > > > >>> in > > > >>> > > the community. > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Matt Burgess < > > > [email protected]> > > > >>> > wrote: > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > >> +1 binding > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > >> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Bryan Bende < > [email protected] > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > >>> All, > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> Following a solid discussion for the past few days [1] > > regarding > > > the > > > >>> > >>> establishment of Registry as a sub-project of Apache NiFi, > I'd > > > like > > > >>> to > > > >>> > >>> call a formal vote to record this important community > decision > > > and > > > >>> > >>> establish consensus. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> The scope of this project is to define APIs for interacting > > with > > > >>> > >>> resources that one or more NiFi instances may be interested > in, > > > such > > > >>> > >>> as a flow registry for versioned flows, an extension registry > > for > > > >>> > >>> extensions, and possibly other configuration resources in the > > > future. > > > >>> > >>> In addition, this project will provide reference > > implementations > > > of > > > >>> > >>> these registries, with the goal of allowing the community to > > > build a > > > >>> > >>> diverse set of implementations, such as a Git provider for > > > versioned > > > >>> > >>> flows, or a bintray provider for an extension registry. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> I am a +1 and looking forward to the future work in this > area. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> The vote will be open for 72 hours and be a majority rule > vote. > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> [ ] +1 Establish Registry, a subproject of Apache NiFi > > > >>> > >>> [ ] 0 Do not care > > > >>> > >>> [ ] -1 Do not establish Registry, a subproject of Apache > NiFi > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> Thanks, > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> Bryan > > > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > >>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/nifi-dev/201702 > . > > > >>> > >> mbox/%3CCALo_M19euo2LLy0PVWmE70FzeLhQRcCtX6 > > > TC%3DqoiBVfn4zFQMA%40mail. > > > >>> > >> gmail.com%3E > > > >>> > >> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -- > > > >> *Joe Percivall* > > > >> linkedin.com/in/Percivall > > > >> e: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > -- > *Joe Percivall* > linkedin.com/in/Percivall > e: [email protected] >
