On 7/24/06, Carl Trieloff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The synapse ones are clearly software though... At this point I am not trying to argue to use or non-use of a name. Just understand how does Apache deals with this.
apache believes that continuous improvement is more important than consistency with the status quo. we aren't infallible. we make plenty of mistakes but we try hard to learn. the standards we demand of new projects evolve. this isn't for the sake of extra overhead but because we believe that these changes will result in new projects being stronger, healthier and more successful than previous projects. until the issues are well understoof and a consensus written up as policy, we deal with it in the way we are now: by discussing the issue and debating how best to deal with it. Maybe we should use Synapse as the comp project to understand as it is
quite a recent project, and this link http://www.synapse.co.in/homepage/trademarks.shtml .
that this is what we'd like to avoid. sadly, we don't always succeed. How was the decision made around Synapse? the incubator discussion is here: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200508.mbox/thread synapse was proposed by the web services project and (unfortunately) the proposal was discussed on a private list. IMHO this process is less than ideal. sponsorship by the incubator PMC is now the favoured route. i would like the incubator PMC (in future) to adopt a more active role in ensuring technical compliance even when the proposal is sponsored by another project. - robert
