Thanks Shane. We'll work on a separate thread to clear up the branding issues of this page, so that we don't have to change the URL again.
On 22 October 2012 15:04, Shane Curcuru <a...@shanecurcuru.org> wrote: > (Please note the distribution lists used) > > First off, apologies for not weighing in sooner; it seemed last week that > a simple rename was going to be done, which was a great place to start, so > I figured the community could either speak up or provide some more details. > And thank you both for recognizing and working to assuage each others' > frustration. 8-) > > One question for my edification: is this github repo primarily bits of > software that might be compiled into Apache Cloudstack directly (i.e. that > Foo Co. is likely to take Cloudstack, take a bit of this repo, and build > and sell some service directly based on the combined software product)? OR > is this primarily for external add-ons or administrative bits that are used > to build or maintain independent services that would live atop Cloudstack? > > ---- > > Simply the name of the github repo is not necessarily a trademark issue. > Fundamentally, trademarks are about preventing *user* confusion. I.e. > trademarks are designed to ensure that an informed user (in this case, > presumably a dev or sysadmin who wants to run a cloud) understands the > source of goods - here, the Apache Cloudstack software product, which comes > from the ASF and the Apache Cloudstack podling. > > Thus just the name of the github repo is only partly relevant to it's > trademark 'importance' to the ASF. What's important is how the repo is > presented to users, both in terms of the homepage and overview, and > especially in terms of any obvious "download this product" pages. > > Without having read all of this thread yet or understanding exactly what > kind of software is there, my first unofficial reaction would be that if > the (P)PMC doesn't explicitly disapprove of the " > github.com/cloudstack-extras" name, then it would be OK from the > trademarks@ point of view as long as it is clearly branded to > differentiate itself from Apache Cloudstack. For starters, the URL should > generally comply with the domain name policy: > > > http://www.apache.org/**foundation/marks/domains.html<http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/domains.html> > > (Note, the domain name policy is actually about domain.names, not /paths, > however it has the clearest set of rules & rationales) > > Make sense? > > - Shane > > > On 10/20/2012 5:17 PM, Noah Slater wrote: > >> Thanks for your note, David. I am sorry for not responding to the email >> sooner. And I am sorry that I have caused you some frustration. You will >> note that I have not given a -1 on the name, or even said that we cannot >> do it. >> >> (Unless I explicitly put my mentor hat on, you can assume everything I >> say is my personal opinion and not me "handing down" policy. I've only >> been here five years, and I am learning the ropes in much the same way.) >> >> You are perhaps right that this name is nominative use. I think I would >> be more convinced of that if the rest of the problems were sorted out. >> My email was sent with the assumption that this name change was all you >> had proposed to do. Clearly, that is not good enough, and you seem to >> agree with me on that point. So perhaps there is no problem here. >> >> I also understand and agree with your reasoning that lazy consensus on >> the actual name itself was a fine assumption to make given the lack of >> response. Though, of course, lazy consensus does not mean members of the >> community cannot voice their opinions after the fact, for whatever >> reason. (My reason being inattentiveness, and not just trying to >> be awkward.) >> >> There is a good chance that when Shane picks this up he, in his >> typically good natured and informed perspective, confirms that >> "cloudstack-extra" is okay as long as the rest of the page is fixed up >> to indicate provenance and clearly set expectation for users, and >> clearly indicate that "CloudStack" is a trademark of the Apache >> CloudStack project. In which case, we don't have a problem. (Assuming >> those things are done.) >> >> And my comment about my doing my job as a mentor poorly was a reaction >> to what I perceived as you saying "if you care so much, you do it." And >> the reason that is a problem for me is that my goal is to get the >> community to care about these things, so that I don't have to. If that >> makes sense. Though having said that, I am also interested in >> contributing to the project in a wider sense. But I would feel more >> comfortable doing that when I am confident the stuff I am doing would >> happen anyway. >> >> Sorry if I've caused frustration, again. I can understand why you would >> feel frustrated. That was not my intention. >> >> On 20 October 2012 21:43, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us >> <mailto:da...@gnsa.us>> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Noah Slater <nsla...@apache.org >> <mailto:nsla...@apache.org>> wrote: >> > On 20 October 2012 18:10, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us >> <mailto:da...@gnsa.us>> wrote: >> > >> >> On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Noah Slater >> <nsla...@apache.org <mailto:nsla...@apache.org>> wrote: >> >> > Hmm, "cloudstack-extras" seems to me like something that the >> Apache >> >> > CloudStack project is providing. I was hoping for Shane's >> input on this, >> >> > which is why I didn't say anything after looping him in. >> >> >> >> This sat for over a week with nary a comment. >> > >> > >> > I volunteer my time to this project. Any contributions I make are >> on my own >> > time. My employer does not pay me to contribute. CloudStack is >> > an extremely high traffic project and I am doing the best I can to >> > contribute to it. >> >> Let me say that I appreciate your contributions - much of our >> readiness to release is because of your tireless efforts to point out >> our problems - please don't take my frustration as frustration with >> all of your contributions, or even that I disagree with you. >> >> >> > >> > >> >> I don't mean to vent my >> >> frustration, but if you thought there was a problem why not say >> >> something >> > >> > >> > I did. >> >> Forgive me for disagreeing - but there was nothing remotely negative >> about your response. >> >> http://markmail.org/message/**qs5wt2ucjjdj4tfp<http://markmail.org/message/qs5wt2ucjjdj4tfp> >> >> You said you were looping in someone else - expanding the audience, >> not a bad thing - there was no indication that you thought that. >> >> One of the things you indicated was problematic in your earlier mail >> was the account name github.com/cloudstack >> <http://github.com/cloudstack> - which was all I was >> >> attempting to solve at this time. The rest still remain issues - but I >> will discuss those in a bit in a followup to your earlier email. >> >> > >> > I CCed Shane (our VP of Brand Management) because I wanted his >> input. I >> > brought up the concern previously on the mailing list, and >> nothing much >> > seemed to happen. This time, I thought I would loop Shane in to >> clarify any >> > questions. I guess he was busy too. >> > >> > >> >> How long should I have waited? >> > >> > >> > I don't know. But following up was another option. Sometimes >> emails get >> > lost in the noise. After 6 days you posted a note to say you were >> going to >> > go ahead and name the repos. You assumed lazy consensus, but I >> think my >> > previous notes to the list should have been indication enough >> that we had >> > not established consensus. >> >> This particular action (renaming the account) was taken in response to >> your referenced email wherein you complained about the name. >> Your note was not a -1 (and had it been, per >> >> http://apache.org/foundation/**how-it-works.html#management<http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#management>you >> should >> have pointed out what the problems were with the account name choice >> or offered an alternative. Your email in response to my proposal of >> cloudstack-extras did neither of those, and no one from trademarks@ >> responded negatively either. How is one not supposed to assume that >> there is lazy consensus to change the name to cloudstack-extras out of >> that?) How is the account name cloudstack-extras not a nominative use >> of the term CloudStack and pointing out that it is 'extra' the >> definition of which means outside or in addition to. With the >> exception of the CloudStack repo contained therein, all of the >> included code is something outside of our in addition to CloudStack. >> Every use of the word CloudStack is not a trademark violation - even >> if it is in software. >> >> >> > >> > >> >> I could have left this as >> >> github.com/cloudstack <http://github.com/cloudstack> and not >> >> spent the time and energy to make the >> >> move, blog about it, notify the many people who this move >> affects etc. >> >> >> > >> > This isn't really an option, as I have outlined before. >> >> You are missing my point, I want the problem solved. I want folks to >> realize that CloudStack is at the ASF and for their to be no brand >> confusion. What I don't want to do is waste my time when I propose, >> and then try and fix some of the problems you outline. I am willing to >> do the work to get this done. >> >> >> > >> > >> >> While I seek to make sure we do what is best for the project, it's >> >> exhausting to try and comply with the demands, only to propose >> things, >> >> get zero feedback, make the changes, publicize the changes, and >> then >> >> days later get feedback that it isn't acceptable. >> > >> > >> > This is an unfair characterisation of my involvement. I have not >> made any >> > "demands" of you. I gave repeated, and detailed feedback on this >> issue. But >> > this seems to have been ignored. >> > >> >> Not at all - this was actually an attempt to fix one of the github >> issues. It wasn't an attempt to fix them all - it was an attempt to >> change the name. In followup to that mail - I sent a mail to the list >> saying I was going to do the work to change the name, I tossed out a >> proposal and asked if there were any objections to the name. The only >> email in response was one of you indicating you were copying >> trademarks@ - otherwise nothing negative. >> >> >> > >> >> To that end, I've >> >> made you an admin on that github project - please take whatever >> action >> >> suits you. >> >> >> > >> > This is a disappointing response. Of course, I will take no such >> action. >> > Despite the fact that I am not prepared to unilaterally change >> something as >> > important as this Github organisation without all the facts, my >> aim is to >> > help Apache CloudStack adjust to Apache. If the response to my >> guidance is >> > "oh well, you better fix it then" then I am obviously doing a >> very poor job. >> >> My response is this: >> I tried to remedy something you saw as a problem (the github account >> name). I proposed a solution on list. I waited a week. I saw no >> negative response to the name. I changed it. Two days after I changed >> it you come back saying that is still a problem, but not suggesting >> any alternatives for identifying a collection of repos for things that >> are useful to CloudStack. I don't have any more suggestions to remedy >> this. I do wish to empower you as a member and participant of this >> community, who is doing work in this community, to not be blocked in >> implementing a solution. >> >> > >> > >> >> > There are still several problems with this page: >> >> > >> >> > - The "cloudstack-extras" name seems confusing, as stated >> above. The >> >> > Apache extras is fine, because we are providing it. But >> Apache has no >> >> > oversight for this repository, so it should clearly >> indicate it's >> >> > provenance. (i.e. Citrix tools for CloudStack — which would, >> >> incidentally, >> >> > be a much better name. Perhaps change it to "Citrix"?) >> >> >> >> We toyed with the idea of Citrix - and I can probably jump >> through the >> >> hoops for that as well, but Citrix would also have issues with >> this, >> >> as virtually none of the software contained therein belongs to >> Citrix, >> >> nor do they really have control over it. This is largely code >> without >> >> a single unifying owner. The only commonality is that it is >> focused on >> >> CloudStack. Most of the items contained therein have been >> developed by >> >> people working on and around cloudstack. For instance, >> Edmunds.com, >> >> Opscode, and Enstratus employees wrote knife-cloudstack with no >> Citrix >> >> contributions whatsoever. >> >> >> > >> > I don't know what to suggest then. Perhaps "cloudstack-extras" is >> not such >> > a big problem. I will defer to Shane, who has way more experience >> with this >> > than I do. >> >> This is essentially where I am at - I have no idea for a better name >> that doesn't involve the word cloudstack for identifying this. >> The remaining issues still do exist, and they still need to be solved, >> and eventually we will. >> >> >> >> >> -- >> NS >> > > -- NS
