[policy] Ethics and Project Names - discuss

[Danny Angus <da...@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I think the time might be right to provoke a dispassionate discussion
about our use of proper names for project names.

I'd like to start by suggesting the following for discussion;

That there be a new category of minimum exit requirements named
somthing like "Ethical considerations" and that the initial item in
this list be "The podling name should not equal or contain a proper
noun which may already be associated with any identifiable community
or individual or have a special meaning in any cultural context,
unless such a proper noun is an attribution and is generally accepted
to be relevant, such as the name of an inventor or associated
institution." The intention is to discourage the use of proper names
as project altogether, the exception is to allow the fine tradition of
naming inventions after their inventor to continue.

My reasoning for this is simple, the ASF has a high profile and we
already know that some groups are unhappy with our use of the Apache
name. I wouldn't suggest that we should re-name existing entities, but
I do believe that adoption of a proper name and the high profile it
will undobtedly receive by its association with the ASF is more likely
to be met with disapproval, especially by groups to whom the name
already has a cultural context, than approval. I think this is
particularly true when you consider that sucessful projects have an
on-line profile high enough to eclipse the original use of the name. I
cannot think of an example where re-using a proper name might have any
positive benefit for both parties.

I believe that it is right for us to consider ethical questions, and I
believe that the solution to this one need not be onerous if podlings
are aware of it from the start of their involvement.

WDYT:-
Should we apply ethical considerations at all?
Should we avoid proper names?
... and if not why not?

d.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [policy] Ethics and Project Names - discuss

[Leo Simons <ma...@leosimons.com>]

In Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 01:00:28PM +0100, Danny Angus wrote:
> I think the time might be right to provoke a dispassionate discussion
> about our use of proper names for project names.

Thanks.

> That there be a new category of minimum exit requirements named
> somthing like "Ethical considerations" and that the initial item in
> this list be "The podling name should not equal or contain a proper
> noun which may already be associated with any identifiable community
> or individual or have a special meaning in any cultural context,
> unless such a proper noun is an attribution and is generally accepted
> to be relevant, such as the name of an inventor or associated
> institution." The intention is to discourage the use of proper names
> as project altogether, the exception is to allow the fine tradition of
> naming inventions after their inventor to continue.

^^ could use example / term explanations (I had to look up "proper noun").

> WDYT:-
> Should we apply ethical considerations at all?

Yes; limited to near-universally accepted ones though. We're an international
organisation and any ethical guidelines should take that into account. And I'll
note too ethics are *hard*. "Do No Evil" is not actually such a bad one for
starters.

> Should we avoid proper names?

I don't care much either way. I think some of their usages are quite clever,
like "Apache James", "Apache Geronimo", and others, but I've never felt the
need to be fun or clever when it offends a sizeable body of our contributors
(there will always be something that offends *someone*, can't pleasure the
whole world, have to draw a line somewhere, "contributor" is arbitrary).

> ... and if not why not?

I just disagree with the whole notion of any kind of "ownership" of names
(proper noun ones or just about any others) beyond where it is
delusion/confusing/derogative. Eg "Apache Windows" does not make sense. I
myself have no problem with "Apache Geronimo" because it isn't likely to be
confusing and I personally don't see it as offensive (I can't see software as
offensive, perhaps with exceptions like viruses or trojan horses).

So one reason would be that my personal ethics (as one contributor) somewhat
collide with the kind of name regulation you propose. There can be multiple
such reasons, which might add up to something significant. The prospect of
ethics harmonization using some kind of online consensus-based mechanism
frightens me enough to keep reasonably silent about it though. Maybe just a
simple majority vote is better.

In terms of a vote I'm somewhere around +/-0.

cheers,

Leo "uses a nickname which reminds people of drugs" Simons

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org

Re: [policy] Ethics and Project Names - discuss

[Yoav Shapira <yo...@apache.org>]

Hi,
+0 on ethical criteria in general as long as they're very clearly
defined: it's very easy to get into gray areas because what is or
isn't offensive and what is or isn't "established" is subjective.  I
don't necessarily want to go down the route of having Wikipedia-like
guidelines (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WEB for example as the
guideline on notability), but I'm afraid that might be necessary.
Even your first cut at this name guideline, which looks well
thought-out and articulated, would instantly be the the most
legalese-sounding[1] thing on the incubator web site most likely.
Legalese = a bad thing in my mind...

However, strong +1 to a name acceptance being required as an entry,
not exit, criteria.  We should be able to find a name together on
general@incubator before starting incubation.  The name is the
identity, it's a key bit of data, and downstream decisions (mailing
list names, SVN repo names, publicity around the project, etc.) all
incur additional work or overhead if the names change.

Yoav

[1] Legalese for those unfamiliar with the expression:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalese#Legalese_and_the_plain-English_movement



On 8/29/06, Danny Angus <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the time might be right to provoke a dispassionate discussion
> about our use of proper names for project names.
>
> I'd like to start by suggesting the following for discussion;
>
> That there be a new category of minimum exit requirements named
> somthing like "Ethical considerations" and that the initial item in
> this list be "The podling name should not equal or contain a proper
> noun which may already be associated with any identifiable community
> or individual or have a special meaning in any cultural context,
> unless such a proper noun is an attribution and is generally accepted
> to be relevant, such as the name of an inventor or associated
> institution." The intention is to discourage the use of proper names
> as project altogether, the exception is to allow the fine tradition of
> naming inventions after their inventor to continue.
>
> My reasoning for this is simple, the ASF has a high profile and we
> already know that some groups are unhappy with our use of the Apache
> name. I wouldn't suggest that we should re-name existing entities, but
> I do believe that adoption of a proper name and the high profile it
> will undobtedly receive by its association with the ASF is more likely
> to be met with disapproval, especially by groups to whom the name
> already has a cultural context, than approval. I think this is
> particularly true when you consider that sucessful projects have an
> on-line profile high enough to eclipse the original use of the name. I
> cannot think of an example where re-using a proper name might have any
> positive benefit for both parties.
>
> I believe that it is right for us to consider ethical questions, and I
> believe that the solution to this one need not be onerous if podlings
> are aware of it from the start of their involvement.
>
> WDYT:-
> Should we apply ethical considerations at all?
> Should we avoid proper names?
> ... and if not why not?
>
> d.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org