+1 for continuing to use the name “Apache Pulsar”.
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 8:03 AM, Sanjeev Kulkarni <sanjee...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for continuing to use the name “Apache Pulsar”. > > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 5:01 PM Matteo Merli <mme...@apache.org> wrote: > > > As some in Pulsar community are already aware, one of the pending > > tasks for Pulsar project to complete the "name search task". > > > > A JIRA task was opened to collect facts around usages of Pulsar > > name: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-141 > > > > I had forwarded that to trademarks@ and this was the response > > from Mark Thomas. > > > > > Pulsar is a very popular name for software. > > > > > > I don't see any obvious conflicts but given the popularity of the name > > > it is likely, in a global marketplace, that there will be some. > > > > > > Should the project wish to register the "PULSAR" mark in the future, it > > > is uncertain whether the ASF would be able to. Registering "APACHE > > > PULSAR" is unlikely to hit any difficulties. > > > > > > It is more likely than usual that an infringement will emerge in the > > > future that would require the project to rename. > > > > > > The podling needs to make a choice. Either: > > > > > > a) continue using PULSAR and accept that: > > > - there are likely to be some restrictions on how the name is used > > > (primarily that it always has to be APACHE PULSAR) > > > - it is more likely than for most ASF projects that the project > > > will be required to rename due to an infringement > > > > > > or > > > > > > b) pick a new name > > > > > > No rush on this. The podling should take time to discuss this. > > > > > > Therefore we need to take a decision on this matter. > > > > My personal inclination is to continue to use "Apache Pulsar" and > > have that to be registered as a trademark of ASF. > > > > My reasoning: > > > > * We are anyway already always referring to "Apache Pulsar" > > rather than just "Pulsar" > > > > * Changing name at this point in life of the project would be > > very disruptive. We just spent the past year into building > > some naming awareness and it would all vanish, not to mention > > the huge amount of work in updating documentation, package > > names, etc. > > > > * If a conflict arise later on, it might be easier to change > > name at that point. Once the project has a larger community > > and bigger recognition, changing name would not mean to > > restart from scratch. > > > > > > I propose to have anyone share they thoughs on this issue. Once > > there is a prevalent inclination in the community, we can vote a > > final resolution on the subject. > > > > Thanks, > > Matteo > > > > > > > > -- > > Matteo Merli > > <mme...@apache.org> > > >
