On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:48 PM Jerry Peng <jerry.boyang.p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I completely agree with want Matteo said. Changing the name will > effectively kill the project. Changing the project will probably also > implying changing the package names in the code itself which will be a > breaking and non-backwards compatible change. Any reasonable developer > will be turned off by this. > > > To be honest, considering something that might happen in 4 years is > analogous to preventing a plane from taking off because someone might chock > on peanuts during the flight. Lets first get the plane to take off. > I like this, strongly +1. #shipit > > On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 6:39 PM Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 for using the name "Apache Pulsar". > > > > - Sijie > > > > 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> > > > > > >
