First, I'd like to take this opportunity to update the list about the
conversation. We spent some time during the last project discussing about
this, which you can find here
<http://meetings.jenkins-ci.org/jenkins/2014/jenkins.2014-11-12-19.04.log.html#l-50>
.

Because there was no obvious consensus, people at the meeting felt that we
wanted feedbacks from more people.

We want to make a final decision on this in the next meeting, one way or
the other. If you have any thoughts/opinions/votes/etc, please send them in
by then.



2014-11-21 2:25 GMT+01:00 Owen Mehegan <[email protected]>:

> I polled a few of my coworkers, and asked them what these three names
> indicate to them:
>
> Jenkins Enterprise by CloudBees
> CloudBees Jenkins Enterprise
> Jenkins
>
> Everyone agreed that, in that context, it's clear that Jenkins is a
> stand-alone thing, and Jenkins Enterprise by CloudBees is a version of
> Jenkins made by a company/group named CloudBees. But CloudBees Jenkins
> Enterprise left them a little vague on where the heavy lifting was
> happening (my word choice). I also raised the convention of e.g. Red Hat
> Enterprise Linux, and people agreed that that naming makes it clear that
> it's Linux + Red Had secret sauce, rather than Red Hat something or other
> with Linux mixed in. Given that, they would not feel confused by CloudBees
> Enterprise Jenkins. I don't exactly know why this is - just something in
> the brain when you read these things.
>
> This jibes with my instinct as well. It's nothing to do with CloudBees - I
> fully support Kohsuke's point that it's important not to discourage
> commercial involvement with the product. But I think, to put it another
> way, Oracle Enterprise Jenkins sounds better than Oracle Jenkins Enterprise
> (is it Oracle Jenkins, different from regular Jenkins?).
>
> My 2 cents.
>
> On Wednesday, November 5, 2014 10:39:03 AM UTC-8, Kohsuke Kawaguchi 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.
>



-- 
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.

Reply via email to