Are the three Cloudbees products standalone or do they sit on top of Jenkins? I'm wondering if they are standalone whether the "powered by" type approach is more appropriate? (i.e. you've got your product name - CloudBees Enterprise - and its powered under the hood by Jenkins)
Richard. On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Kohsuke Kawaguchi <[email protected]> wrote: > Jenkins project necessitates > <https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Governance+Document#GovernanceDocument-Trademark> > that when a 3rd party uses the name "Jenkins" it would have to get a > blessing from the project meeting. > > In the past, we've established that "Jenkins Foo by AcmeCorp" is generally > an acceptable pattern. CloudBees has gotten several approvals that match > this convention, such as Jenkins Enterprise by CloudBees. > > In this post, I'm requesting that we bless "AcmeCorp Jenkins Foo" as a > generally acceptable pattern. And specifically, CloudBees want to get an > approval for the following patterns: > > - CloudBees Jenkins Enterprise > - CloudBees Jenkins Operations Center > - CloudBees Jenkins Analytics > > With my OSS hat on, I think our guiding principle in the past name usage > approval is that the use does not cause confusions among users as to the > source of the effort/product. This is the same with other organizations. > See what Apache says on this topic > <http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#guidelines>. There are a > numerous other examples of names that fit this convention in other > open-source projects, such as HP Helion OpenStack > <http://www8.hp.com/us/en/cloud/hphelion-openstack-overview.html>, Piston > OpenStack <http://pistoncloud.com/openstack-cloud-software/>, CollabNet > Subversion Edge <http://www.collab.net/community/subversion>, Red Hat > Enterprise Linux > <http://www.redhat.com/en/technologies/linux-platforms/enterprise-linux> > just to name a few. > > I also think a policy that's not overly restrictive to the participants, > even for commercial entities, helps the community grow faster. While > commercial interest to an OSS project is always seen bit suspiciously, > especially in this project given the past with Oracle, the participation > from companies like CloudBees, Praqma, and Red Hat helped in many ways, > ranging from putting more developers to event organizations. Linux is a > good example of this, which enabled a lot of participations & adoptions. > This was always my mental model for Jenkins, and one that fits with the > open-ended plugin ecosystem in Jenkins. > > I had some conversation with Andrew and Dean about this topic, and we felt > that the next step is to bring this to here for a wider discussion. > > Dean wanted to make sure (and I hope I'm not putting words in his mouth > here) that we aren't bending rules and principles just because it came from > CloudBees, as CloudBees is a big player in this community. And I agree --- > we should be just as happy to accept "Oracle Jenkins Cloud", "Microsoft > Jenkins Cluster", or whatever, in principle. > > So there it is. Your thoughts and feedbacks appreciated. I'm hoping that > we can get this officially approved soon. > > -- > Kohsuke Kawaguchi > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
