incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shane Curcuru <...@shanecurcuru.org>
Subject Re: apache binary distributions
Date Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:55:47 GMT
On 8/16/15 9:05 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> The Hadoop PMC is utterly free to produce a Hadoop RPM with Hadoop in
it
>>>>> that corresponds to an Apache Hadoop release.  Having project Foo
>>>> produce a
>>>>> release of Bar, Baz and Pigdog is pretty far off the reservation,
>>>> however.
>>>>
>>>> It is. But if they screw up packaging guidelines inadvertently and the
>>>> downstream
>>>> want to take matters in their own hands -- how is it "off the reservation"?
>>>>
>>>
>>> The downstream shouldn't be calling their artifacts Hadoop if they aren't
>>> the Hadoop PMC in any case.
>>
>> But they do. And not just hadoop -- go do searches on pkgs.org and see
>> for yourself.
>>
>> Now that takeaway from this thread for me so far is this: in order for the
>> trademark enforcement to be invoked there has to be a legitimate concern
>> from the PMC. The foundation is not in a business of blatant brand policing
>> (otherwise quite a few C&D should've been sent already to various Linux
>> distros).
>>
> 
> It is the PMC's reponsibility to police their brand. [1] Some projects
> police it very loosely, others much more rigidly. If a project were to
> wish to go the Mozilla route, I am sure they could.  The foundation
> provides projects with nice, generic scaffolding that gives some
> flexibility, but generally just works. The foundation itself rarely
> engages in trademark policing without the PMC requesting help.

That being said, let's be clear since we're on a publicly archived list
here: The ASF owns all Apache trademarks on behalf of our projects.  We
certainly hope - and often only have the volunteer energy for - having
the PMCs take the lead in reporting and attempting to police misuse of
their project's marks.  But if a PMC is truly falling down on the job -
or if a PMC is unfairly allowing one/some companies to take advantage of
their project brand - the ASF can and will enforce our polices at the
Foundation level.

This really is a rare case, but we do need to be clear from the policy
side.  I'm not particularly concerned about less-active projects that
might just let things slide (or not be aware of) or slide into
obscurity.  I am concerned that some PMCs might not take policing
seriously enough when it comes to vendors specifically pushing the
boundaries in ways that harm our Apache wide reputation for project
independence:
  https://community.apache.org/projectIndependence.html

- Shane

> 
> 
> [1] http://apache.org/foundation/marks/responsibility#responsible
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message