+1 Imolementers

On Mon, 5 Oct 2015 at 20:26 Bob Briody <[email protected]> wrote:

> I've always liked the terms implementer and implementation. Plus, as
> Stephen stated, this was how it used to roll anyway.
>
> Everyone else is just a "user", right? Point being, "users" is a good term
> to group application developers, driver developers, and whoever else into a
> set of personas that operate via the APIs and are basically just not
> implementers.
>
> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Jason Plurad <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Down with vendors, Up with implementers.
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Stephen Mallette <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > If memory serves, we've only used "vendor" for as long as TP3 has been
> > > around.  I swear those who built on top of Blueprints were "Blueprints
> > > Implementers".  If they built Gremlin (e.g. gremlin-scala) then we had
> > > "Gremlin Implementers".  I'm not sure we went so far to say "Rexster
> > > Implementers", but the idea is sound.  Anywho, "Implementers" does the
> > > trick for me.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Andrew Fitzgerald <
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +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
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Have a good one,
> > Jason
> >
>

Reply via email to