On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> > wrote: > >> > The Hadoop PMC is utterly free to produce a Hadoop RPM with Hadoop in it >> > that corresponds to an Apache Hadoop release. Having project Foo >> produce a >> > release of Bar, Baz and Pigdog is pretty far off the reservation, >> however. >> >> It is. But if they screw up packaging guidelines inadvertently and the >> downstream >> want to take matters in their own hands -- how is it "off the reservation"? >> > > The downstream shouldn't be calling their artifacts Hadoop if they aren't > the Hadoop PMC in any case.
But they do. And not just hadoop -- go do searches on pkgs.org and see for yourself. Now that takeaway from this thread for me so far is this: in order for the trademark enforcement to be invoked there has to be a legitimate concern from the PMC. The foundation is not in a business of blatant brand policing (otherwise quite a few C&D should've been sent already to various Linux distros). Thanks, Roman. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
