Thanks for your reply, Justin. Now I understand your concern more concretely.
I'll share three points here: 1. First of all, the trademark policy must be followed for the new PPMC. The PPMC will protect the trademark with the guide of trademark policy[1][2]. It's part of the road during the incubation. 2. I worked with the people for a while, and I trust their motivation for running a diverse community. It's impossible to prove, but we can do a few exercises as your new reply. > whereas “CeresDB” should be used in several cases **This is a concern. I'll check it with the initial group, resolve it, and then go back to the list. I hope this is a signal that the project is actively reacting to this concern,**[3] ... although I may regard it as a post-donate action (Answer Cloud is removed after entering the incubator[4]. I did it, followed by some others from Answer's committers). > some entities have taken unfair advantage of this It's also unfair to judge a new incubator proposal to assume, in advance, that they will do something evil. Best, tison. [1] https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/ [2] https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/policies [3] https://github.com/CeresDB/horaedb/issues/1319 [4] https://github.com/apache/incubator-answer-website/commit/e807a7af5e48b3dfb505854f029753daf480362f Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org> 于2023年11月28日周二 18:27写道： > > On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 12:12 PM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > We need to know the reasons for the name change and why the company is > > willing to donate the code but not the name. The possibility of having them > > forking the community later is a risk the Incubator needs to know about and > > should be mentioned in the proposal. Having a brand closely associated with > > a project and owned by a single corporate entity is a risk to the project. > > Why a company would be unwilling to give up that brand or trademark just > > because it may be convenient in the future is a concern. > > While I agree that having a clear reason stated would be helpful, I > think I have a different take on the risks you are outlining here. > > We have tons of examples here in the ASF of project Foo being used to > power commercial product Bar (Geode/Gemfire, Ignite/GridGain, > Kafka/Confluent, and many, many more). So this kind of dual branding > is nothing new -- there's no community fork involved per se. > > It would be nice if the original name of the open source project (as > it existed on Github) was donated to ASF and the new name for a > commercially developed product was picked. But even if it is the other > way around -- I actually don't see any risks for the foundation in > this approach (as long as it is clearly understood that the branding > guidelines on both sides need to be honored). > > Thanks, > Roman. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
