incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geir Magnusson Jr <>
Subject Re: Jini?
Date Mon, 14 Aug 2006 01:51:26 GMT

Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>> I don't know that the name is an issue at all, if Sun is willing to
> transfer
>>> the trademark to the ASF, as was done with SpamAssassin.  The impression
>>> that I have from Craig and others is that this is do-able.  According to
>>> Simon, this is something that a Sun contact can work on, and according
> to
>>> Jim Hurley, "We would prefer to contribute it, but I'd like some
> discussion
>>> on this list on whether that's a viable option."  The answer, Jim, is
> yes.
>>> We did the same with the SpamAssassin trademark.
>> Because there is a difference.  JINI is a "technology domain".
>> SpamAssassin is a project.
> If Sun is going to do the trademark assignment, there is no difference.  We
> would have the trademark for the technology domain.  And if you take into
> consideration the concurrent talk about specifications coming under ASF
> practices, that would dovetail nicely.

Sorry, I think it's a big difference.  We aren't ready to handle either
yet, so I think that the proposed Jini project would be subject to lots
of uncertainty, which isn't fair (been there, done that...)

I guess we could call the project "Apache Jini", but that sounds like an
umbrella in the making, and I don't think we'd allow a Apache AJAX,
Apcahe Web2.0, Apache Java, Apache SQL, Apache Blog, Apache OS,  etc

>>> Between that and Craig's observations regarding the JDO precedent, it
> begs
>>> the question of why we should not go forward with the JINI name, which
> is
>>> what Sun, itself, is offering, and which is the name with which people
>>> associate.  If we eventually find that we must change the name, which it
>>> seems we would all like to avoid, we can do so later.
>> I'd rather go forward with a neutral project name, and then work out the
>> implications of managing a trademark that we'd have to allow others to
> use.
> Given Apache JDO, which is also a technology domain, how do you justify that
> view?  Please note: asking for justification is a debating question, not an
> attack.  :-)

You have to work far harder than that to attack me :)

It's an implementation of a spec. A single spec that is part of an
external spec-governing ecosystem, the JCP.  "Jini" isn't a spec, it's
it's own spec ecosystem. It's not part of the JCP, for example.

So Apache Jini is like saying Apache JCP (I'm stretching to make a


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

View raw message