incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Fluo Parent POM 1-incubating (rc2)
Date Tue, 02 Aug 2016 00:08:59 GMT
Ok, now I'm a bit confused.  I'll try my best to state my points of
clarification in line.

On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 7:37 PM Christopher <> wrote:

> I also wish to point out that the FluoProposal (
> explicitly included an
> intent/wish/request to continue using the Fluo logo (which includes the
> name) on Fluo's historical sites. That proposal was accepted by the IPMC

I'm confused what this has to do with a logo.  I see now in your proposal
that there's an explicit call out for the logo.  I'm not sure why.  Its a
nice logo.  Assuming it was donated as a part of the overall donation, then
there's no issue reusing it on other sites.

> (albeit without an explicit judgment on that issue). While the proposal did
> not explicitly mention the domain name concerns, it did mention the
> continued existence of "historical sites" after acceptance, sites whose
> names could reasonably be expected to contain the Fluo name. I think this
> is important in determining to what extent it should be considered fair and
> reasonable to use the word "Fluo" on "".

The term "historical" is used in the proposal.  My interpretation of its
use is that some sites may exist for historical purposes.  It seems that
the intention however is to keep them going.  The list of sites are not
mentioned, other than a GitHub site, which I'm not sure if that means,, or something else.  Its not obvious to
me that this is which may be hosted as a github pages website.

> At no point in the proposal or vote discussions for Fluo was it mentioned
> that we'd have to remove or transfer control of the domain, in
> order to be compliant with ASF trademark policies upon acceptance into
> Incubator, even though it was clear at the time that 1) the domain existed
> and 2) hosted projects which would transfer to the ASF and projects which
> would not.

The proposal is a bit missing in this area.  I see a documentation section,
which mentions the website  Ignoring this discussion, my
interpretation of this section is that it was being donated.  Yes,
transference of domain names is expected.  Many projects coming in have
done this (, are some examples).  If it was
not intended to be transferred, its not clear to me why its mentioned in
the proposal.

> Taking this into account, and in conjunction with our intent to fix both
> websites to reduce confusion, I hope that we can find a resolution which
> does not require a name change, but can leave both and
> coexisting.
The co-existing part is where you need to talk more to TM and get their buy
in.  Right now we have a highly inconsistent model at the ASF.

> I think our immediate, actionable plan should be to:
> 1. Remove redirect from to

I'm not sure if you're doing this out of anger or what.  The current setup
of redirect is fine.

> 2. Place content on which:
>   2.a) links to Apache Fluo
>   2.b) states that Fluo is a trademark of Apache
>   2.c) clarifies that is not affiliated or endorsed by the ASF
>   2.d) is primarily focused on the community tools it hosts, and not Apache
> Fluo

3. Ensure content on is updated to:
>   3.a) remove pre-apache release or clearly document them.
>   3.b) remove any implication that Fluo depends on any software at
>   3.c) ensure no dependency on external documentation at

All of the items under 3 are great graduation goals, and are not needed in
the short term.

> 4. Standardize on a different publicly available checkstyle and formatter
> ruleset than the io.fluo:resources ones (maybe?)

Just to be clear.  my concern here is shared with the domain name.  If the
domain name is cleared to be used, I don't have a strong concern on this.

> If we're going to expend this effort, it would be nice to get some
> assurances that this will be sufficient to resolve branding concerns, or if
> there are additional steps short of changing the domain names, which we can
> take to resolve these issues.

My recommendation is that be donated to the ASF and a new domain
name chosen for the non-ASF community backed site.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message