[DISCUSS] Adding 'apache-' to our artifact names

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] Adding 'apache-' to our artifact names

Joe Witt
All,

We received feedback from an IPMC member who gave us a +1 on the vote
for 0.0.2 but provided what he called minor/trivial feedback.  The
statement he made was:

"Consider adding apache to source artefact names for possible extra
legal protection / branding"

This concept is discussed briefly in this section [1].

I had personally already seen this guidance and decided not to add it
as we were putting artifacts in initially.  My reasoning was:
 -  It is not required and of unclear value
 - It adds an additional seven characters to artifact names which are
often already quite long
 - We already have a maven group name of 'org.apache.nifi'
 - it didn't appear to me to be common practice among other projects

What does cause me to think twice about this though is this IPMC
member does a great job of reviewing releases and providing thoughtful
and very detailed feedback.

So I'd just like us to have a good consensus on this one.

If anyone feels strongly that we should add 'apache-' to our artifact
names please advise.

[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#naming

Thanks
Joe
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Adding 'apache-' to our artifact names

Sean Busbey
Does anyone know of other projects that do this?

The standard post-incubator trademark guidelines already will have people
saying "Apache NiFi" for the first reference in a document. That's plenty
IMO.

Also, we're still incubator, which means we have to caveat any claims to
the ASF marks.

--
Sean
On Mar 14, 2015 9:58 PM, "Joe Witt" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> All,
>
> We received feedback from an IPMC member who gave us a +1 on the vote
> for 0.0.2 but provided what he called minor/trivial feedback.  The
> statement he made was:
>
> "Consider adding apache to source artefact names for possible extra
> legal protection / branding"
>
> This concept is discussed briefly in this section [1].
>
> I had personally already seen this guidance and decided not to add it
> as we were putting artifacts in initially.  My reasoning was:
>  -  It is not required and of unclear value
>  - It adds an additional seven characters to artifact names which are
> often already quite long
>  - We already have a maven group name of 'org.apache.nifi'
>  - it didn't appear to me to be common practice among other projects
>
> What does cause me to think twice about this though is this IPMC
> member does a great job of reviewing releases and providing thoughtful
> and very detailed feedback.
>
> So I'd just like us to have a good consensus on this one.
>
> If anyone feels strongly that we should add 'apache-' to our artifact
> names please advise.
>
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#naming
>
> Thanks
> Joe
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Adding 'apache-' to our artifact names

Benson Margulies
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 11:49 PM, Sean Busbey <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Does anyone know of other projects that do this?
>
> The standard post-incubator trademark guidelines already will have people
> saying "Apache NiFi" for the first reference in a document. That's plenty
> IMO.
>
> Also, we're still incubator, which means we have to caveat any claims to
> the ASF marks.

I know of examples in both directions. Lucene does _not_, to cite a big one.

It could be tangled up with the big trademark question: if the
trademark is (some day) 'Apache NiFi' as opposed to 'NiFi', it might
make sense for the file to be named 'apache-nifi-...'. However, I
would not change anything we push to Maven Central no matter what. We
could also ask for more broad advice; clearly at one point it was
endemic to make it apache- and then it appears that thinking shifted.



>
> --
> Sean
> On Mar 14, 2015 9:58 PM, "Joe Witt" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> We received feedback from an IPMC member who gave us a +1 on the vote
>> for 0.0.2 but provided what he called minor/trivial feedback.  The
>> statement he made was:
>>
>> "Consider adding apache to source artefact names for possible extra
>> legal protection / branding"
>>
>> This concept is discussed briefly in this section [1].
>>
>> I had personally already seen this guidance and decided not to add it
>> as we were putting artifacts in initially.  My reasoning was:
>>  -  It is not required and of unclear value
>>  - It adds an additional seven characters to artifact names which are
>> often already quite long
>>  - We already have a maven group name of 'org.apache.nifi'
>>  - it didn't appear to me to be common practice among other projects
>>
>> What does cause me to think twice about this though is this IPMC
>> member does a great job of reviewing releases and providing thoughtful
>> and very detailed feedback.
>>
>> So I'd just like us to have a good consensus on this one.
>>
>> If anyone feels strongly that we should add 'apache-' to our artifact
>> names please advise.
>>
>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/releasemanagement.html#naming
>>
>> Thanks
>> Joe
>>