<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Hi,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Indeed - I was going to chime in with a similar comment as Frank.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Condor went through the same thing a few years back. In the end, they weren't allowed to release a product named "Condor" and host a webpage saying "this is Condor", but there wasn't any need to rename functions / packags / command line tools.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Similarly, you can have a function named "google_this" but you will get sued out of existence if you named your product "The Google".</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Another example is CentOS, which takes care to remove references to "RedHat" in significant parts of their releases and replace it with "The Upstream Vendor".</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I'd argue that we don't need to start doing an extensive scrubbing a-priori, but can do the reasonably obvious stuff and only go to the harder level as necessary.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I would propose:</div><div class="">- Create an org, rename the repository.</div><div class=""> - Focus on getting CI builds, testing, and automated packaging going.</div><div class="">- In any future release notes, carefully state that it is the "community-maintained version of the software provided by the Globus Toolkit."</div><div class="">- Engage with the EPEL / Fedora / Debian / Ubuntu maintainers to do what's right for their respective communities.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Brian</div><div class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Oct 20, 2017, at 8:56 AM, Brian Lin <<a href="mailto:blin@cs.wisc.edu" class="">blin@cs.wisc.edu</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
Frank,<br class="">
<br class="">
Does this mean that we can keep the repository name the same (e.g.
just fork it in GitHub)? How about the EPEL/Debian/Ubuntu packaging?
That would certainly make life easier for everyone all around and
we'd just have to worry about the name of the GitHub org.<br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks,<br class="">
Brian<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/20/2017 08:45 AM, Frank Scheiner
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:1418b681-4e07-efdd-aa9c-3e647bb22a0e@hlrs.de" class="">Hi all,
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 10/20/2017 03:31 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote:
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">Hi Oliver,
<br class="">
<br class="">
On 10/20/2017 03:27 PM, Oliver Keeble wrote:
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">[...]
<br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">There is by the way another
important issue with not being able to use
<br class="">
the word globus: it's in almost every library name in the
toolkit. So if
<br class="">
we want to/must remove it from there too, we need a
rebuild of each
<br class="">
globus-depending software product... It also could mean
having all the
<br class="">
products needing re-adoption into Fedora/EPEL and Debian.
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
Is it something that can be avoided?
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
I think it can certainly be avoided. Globus may trademark the
name (have they?)
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
Yes, they have. See the bottom message on [1] and [2].
<br class="">
<br class="">
[1]: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://toolkit.globus.org/toolkit/">http://toolkit.globus.org/toolkit/</a>
<br class="">
<br class="">
[2]:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://toolkit.globus.org/toolkit/contributions.html#Cobranding">http://toolkit.globus.org/toolkit/contributions.html#Cobranding</a>
<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
<br class="">
Although "Globus" is a trademark, the use of "Globus"/"globus" in
the source code in file names, directory names, function,
variable, etc. names and the names of compiled executables and
libraries is a different thing, I believe.
<br class="">
<br class="">
The source code contains "Globus"/"globus" everywhere but is
licensed under an Open Source license, which in my eyes includes
reuse as-is without prior changes, even for binaries, as the names
for the binaries are determined by the Makefiles which are part of
the source code.
<br class="">
<br class="">
Cheers,
<br class="">
Frank
<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br class="">
<pre wrap="" class="">_______________________________________________
Gt-eos mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Gt-eos@mailman.egi.eu">Gt-eos@mailman.egi.eu</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.egi.eu/mailman/listinfo/gt-eos">http://mailman.egi.eu/mailman/listinfo/gt-eos</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">Gt-eos mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Gt-eos@mailman.egi.eu" class="">Gt-eos@mailman.egi.eu</a><br class="">http://mailman.egi.eu/mailman/listinfo/gt-eos<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>