+1 for dropping "vendor" On Oct 5, 2015 11:39 AM, "David Robinson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> We may agree, Marko, on the discussion around "vendor", but some things > just aren't worth it. > By strict definition, not opinion, it does define someone selling > something. > > If the term is offensive, let's pick a new term we try to en-grain in our > behavior and move on. > > We can focus on more important things - like helping our vendors...I mean > "TP Implementors" use this cool think called TinkerPop/Gremlin. > > Here are two suggestions to place on the vote list for terminology: > > a) Application Developers - those leveraging the Gremlin Language / APIs on > top of an implementation - be that Titan, Orient, Neo4J, Flink, Spark, > whatever. > > a) TinkerPop Implementers (or Implementers for short) - those that > implement an underlying system, whether for sale or not, that expose the > Gremlin Language / API. > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Marko Rodriguez <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hello Pp-otik-ner > > > > It seems that the mentors are adverse to the term "vendor" even though as > > the mentees have explained Hadoop, Spark, Gremlin-Scala, gremlin-php, > etc. > > are all considered "vendors." That is, anything that implements the > > TinkerPop3 API regardless of them being commercial or otherwise is a > vendor. > > > > With that said (and known), we can continually go back and forth with > "No. > > 'vendor' means this." "Uh uh, it doesn't -- it means this." "That makes > no > > sense cause to me it means this." > > > > If we are going to get TinkerPop out of the malaise of personal opinions > > and arguments about meaning in the English language (in zeitgeist), I say > > we bring this to a collective VOTE which includes the whole community > (i.e. > > gremlin-users@ as well). I would frame the vote as: > > > > "Should TinkerPop abstain from its use of the word 'vendor' (to > > categorize graph system and graph language implementers) because, to you, > > it strongly implies commercial interest?" > > > > With that vote tally, we can then do accordingly and from then on, no > > individual's personal opinion about the meaning of "vendor" will be > > considered a valid argument given that language is a socially constructed > > phenomena. > > > > Thoughts?, > > Marko. > > > > http://markorodriguez.com > > > > >
