Hi Pawel, We had a conversation at the Jenkins Governance meeting last week, and the consensus was that we are not ready to vote. Our consensus was that "VirtusLab Operator Service for Jenkins" or similar names represent a pretty much automatic approval while VirtusLab Jenkins Operator Service needs voting. I do not think there is an exceptional case, IMHO we should stick to the process. It is a +[1...-1] vote from the community members, with absolute majority vote in the mailing list and at the next governance meeting.
Given your explicit preference for "VirtusLab Jenkins Operator Service" , I think we should start the voting with target of concluding it next week. Fine with you? Best regards, Oleg Nenashev On Monday, December 7, 2020 at 8:12:11 PM UTC+1 [email protected] wrote: > 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> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> -- 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/85e5ad7e-247e-4a54-a048-b500154bb42bn%40googlegroups.com.
