Hi Oleg Not sure if this was already discussed. Of course if it is possible we would definitely prefer *VirtusLab Jenkins Operator Service* as it clearly indicates intent (it is Jenkins Operator - delivered as service; given it is based on Jenkins Operator OSS project). However I do understand we could only ask for charitable interpretation here.
Is there anything we could do to be counted as exceptional case? On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 12:37:51 PM UTC+1 Oleg Nenashev wrote: > > Your suggestions are very reasonable. I think *VirtusLab Jenkins > Operator Service* might be a good name we could use. > > Following the Linux Foundation trademark guidelines remains the preference > IMO, e.g. "VirtusLab Operator Service for Jenkins". Would it work for you? > The suggested *VirtusLab Jenkins Operator Service* name technically may > be approved by the Jenkins Governance Meeting, but it rather for > exceptional cases in our current policy. Would be great to get feedback > from others ahead of the meeting. > > > Regarding the Azure Marketplace, is it worth starting to look at someone > (guessing it would be the Governance Board?) starting to try and contact > the vendors who are supplying the marketplace items to alert them that the > names should really be changed (and then starting to look to enforce it > later down the track)? > > > > On Monday, November 30, 2020 at 2:59:48 PM UTC+1 [email protected] > wrote: > >> Your suggestions are very reasonable. I think *VirtusLab Jenkins >> Operator Service* might be a good name we could use. >> >> On Sunday, November 29, 2020 at 11:51:18 PM UTC+1 Richard Bywater wrote: >> >>> I agree that I think use of a company name within the title is >>> appropriate if it's not part of a base Jenkins community offering. e.g. >>> Jenkins Operator Service might be ok for an official Jenkins community >>> offering of an Operator Service but not for an offering by a particular >>> company. >>> >>> Regarding the Azure Marketplace, is it worth starting to look at someone >>> (guessing it would be the Governance Board?) starting to try and contact >>> the vendors who are supplying the marketplace items to alert them that the >>> names should really be changed (and then starting to look to enforce it >>> later down the track)? >>> >>> Richard. >>> >>> On Mon, 30 Nov 2020 at 11:31, Oleg Nenashev <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Pawel, >>>> >>>> TBH I am not sure "Jenkins Operator Service" would be approved, it is >>>> too generic. I would definitely hesitate voting for it. There is no >>>> precedent of such name being approved before for product names, only for >>>> community-focused events and : >>>> https://www.jenkins.io/project/trademark/approved-usage/ . Before the >>>> Linux Foundation trademark guidelines were adopted, the product names >>>> commonly had the "COMPANY_NAME Jenkins Something" or the "Jenkins >>>> Something >>>> by COMPANY_NAME" naming pattern. It's probably something you could >>>> consider. >>>> >>>> Feedback/suggestions from others would be appreciated. >>>> >>>> P.S: As we discussed a few months ago, product naming on public cloud >>>> marketplaces is a mess at the moment: >>>> https://azuremarketplace.microsoft.com/en-us/marketplace/apps?page=1&search=jenkins >>>> >>>> . So we still need to maintain a balance in trademark sublicense reviews >>>> so >>>> that good faith requests do not create disadvantages compared to vendors >>>> who do not submit trademark sublicense requests. Maybe a listing of >>>> commercial offerings on our site could help with that (similar to >>>> https://wiki.jenkins.io/display/JENKINS/Commercial+Support which still >>>> needs to be moved to jenkins.io) >>>> >>>> BR, Oleg >>>> >>>> On Thursday, November 26, 2020 at 1:38:18 PM UTC+1 [email protected] >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> You are right. In case of this name we would need to pursue the >>>>> approval from Kubernetes organization. >>>>> >>>>> If possible I think ideal name (from our perspective) would be *Jenkins >>>>> Operator* *Service*. I think we could try to agree on some commitment >>>>> from our side when it comes to making sure Jenkins & Kubernetes is a >>>>> great >>>>> match and is being well maintained (but that's obviously something that >>>>> would need to be further discuss, if even viable from your side). Totally >>>>> understand if this is not possible though. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thursday, November 26, 2020 at 12:21:10 PM UTC+1 Oleg Nenashev >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Pawel, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the follow-up and for looking for an alternative name. I >>>>>> have added the trademark usage request review/approval to the Dec 02 >>>>>> Governance Meeting agenda >>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/11Nr8QpqYgBiZjORplL_3Zkwys2qK1vEvK-NYyYa4rzg/edit#heading=h.v4sls9rnbtoa>. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let's see whether we can reach a consensus in the email list ahead of >>>>>> the >>>>>> meeting. >>>>>> >>>>>> One challenge for the naming is that the suggested name (Kubernetes >>>>>> Operator Service for Jenkins) uses not only the Jenkins trademark, but >>>>>> also >>>>>> "Kubernetes" which is also the Linux Foundation trademark subject to the >>>>>> same trademark usage rules. It is less of a concern for the Jenkins >>>>>> community, but please keep in mind that our approval, if granted, will >>>>>> address only the "Jenkins" trademark usage. The "Kubernetes" trademark >>>>>> usage is not something we can approve or reject, it is a subject for a >>>>>> separate discussion with the trademark owner. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> Oleg Nenashev >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thursday, November 26, 2020 at 12:01:17 PM UTC+1 >>>>>> [email protected] wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Jenkinsci Board >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We are the authors of OSS >>>>>>> https://github.com/jenkinsci/kubernetes-operator project. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We started building commercial managed offering based on this >>>>>>> project - managed version available in Azure marketplace. Given that >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> project is commercial offering built on top of OSS *Jenkins >>>>>>> Operator *we wanted to name it *Jenkins Operator Service *(which we >>>>>>> thought describes pretty well what it is, managed service for OSS >>>>>>> project). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Our initial draft of the offering is here: >>>>>>> https://jenkins-operator.com/ (currently private preview). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Given trademark guidelines here: >>>>>>> https://www.linuxfoundation.org/trademark-usage/ it seems however >>>>>>> that it might be worth to reconsider the suggested name and change it >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> something like: *Kubernetes Operator Service for Jenkins * >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is there any way we could apply for sublicensing for using the >>>>>>> "Jenkins" word within our product offering naming? If so, what would we >>>>>>> need to do to apply? >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>> 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]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/1a843791-216c-4e15-8f3f-2da0bc680743n%40googlegroups.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/1a843791-216c-4e15-8f3f-2da0bc680743n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> -- Email correspondence is considered personal data processing. Check out our Privacy Policy <https://virtuslab.com/gdpr> for details about the controller of your data and your rights according to GDPR/RODO. -- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/228a221b-139f-4216-8df2-598c0fe17179n%40googlegroups.com.
