incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roman Shaposhnik <>
Subject Re: apache binary distributions
Date Thu, 06 Aug 2015 18:59:04 GMT
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Niclas Hedhman <> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Roman Shaposhnik <>
> wrote:
>> I honestly see no problem with that, again provided that the artifact can
>> be confused with the one coming from Apache project.
> I think the "problem" lies in Trademarks.

As always ;-) This is actually the subtle point that Jochen seems to be
missing: the ALv2 allows a lot of things that do not necessarily translate
into how ASF manages brands of its projects. The two are separate.

> Debian's Tomcat7 is labeled
> "Servlet and JSP engine" and its Tomcat8 is labeled "Apache Tomcat 8 -
> Servlet and JSP engine", yet I don't see Apache Tomcat project
> creating/maintaining a Debian dist.

Correct. And with Linux distros the very notion of the artifact gets blurry
so much so that pretty much everything they do starts looking like
a derived work.

That's why I like to focus on Maven artifacts since they are much easier
to discuss in the context of not infringing on ASF brands.

> Now, is Debian allowed to call it "Tomcat"? Is it allowed to call Tomcat8
> to BE "Apache Tomcat8", when in fact(!) there are changes to the source,
> such as the start script in Debian Tomcat is not original of Apache Tomcat,
> but instead follows a Debian template for how those scripts should be
> written. I am not sure what all the changes are, feel free to check;

*I* think it should be allowed to as long as the version ID is different. To me,
the full handle for any software artifact always is NAME-VERSION. Linux
distros take the same point of view and have this:

> IF (like Mozilla) Apache decides to strike down on Debian and not allowing
> it to use the same names, _I_ think it is a disservice to the users
> (IceWeasel browser), but as it stands, Apache trademark licensing seems to
> not really be followed (Perhaps Debian has some permission that was granted
> long in the past... I may have missed that).

100% agreeing with the above paragraph.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message