Hi, > I don't see if anywhere “CeresDB” should be used. If so, HoraeDB will change.
In the proposal, IMO CeresDB is not used where it should be, giving a false impression. e.g. "HoraeDB has been open-sourced on GitHub for over a year.” that is not correct as it was CeresDB as the name change only happened a couple of weeks ago. > The org name is where it leaves now and shall not to change. This is > the same as datafuselabs/opendal doesn't change its org name before > proposing for incubation. There is precedent for keeping the org if it already has widespread use and would harm the community with its change. However, it is strongly recommended that the name be changed to the new one. The proposal should state which direction the project will go in. > The same for its doc site ceresdb.github.io/docs This is an issue as a company still owns the brand and trademark. In other cases e.g. Wth Flex, permission was given by Adobbe to use the trademark. Has the company given permission to use their trademark? If so, how is it allowed to be used? This should be included in the proposal. > Also, I don't think the time itself is an issue but the trust and > certainty, because Pekko renames all its references to Akka after > entering the incubator. Pekko was forced to rename due to a hostile license change and they didn't own the name. The proposal stated that they would do this. > So, Justin, your comment is not a reason also, but a suspect for > uncertainty if "some entities have taken unfair advantage of this". > This is neither provable nor unfalsifiable. It is provable - take a look at the trademarks list. I did not want to highlight any particular project and sidetrack the discussion. I think the proposal needs some improvements as mentioned above. Kind Regards, Justin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
