You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@community.apache.org by Owen Rubel <or...@gmail.com> on 2022/05/01 05:39:30 UTC
Re: It’s time to change the name
Well you may not need to.
School and sports teams change their names because they are offensive and
the tribe registers a complaint.
In the sense of the Apache foundation, I sincerely donut the tribe will
ever register an official complaint because it is a nonprofit that does
community outreach and gives away software.
They do not put the tribes image in a poor light nor do they use slogans,
imagery that put the tribe in a poor light
These are all things that would cause the Apache Nation to respond.
The Apache Foundation has seemingly been a good steward so unless someone
from the Apache Nation provides an official complaint, I would not worry.
However... rebranding may be a good suggestion.
Still some community outreach may be good so you can know if you even
SHOULD start the path of rebranding; it may not even be necessary and you
can put it to rest once and for all if they see you as good stewards.,
Owen Rubel
orubel@gmail.com
On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 5:49 AM Ed Mangini <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> Creative!
>
> How do we change the original intent?
>
> Our website directly references the Apache tribe, and that data point is
> referenced in various web assets of which we have no control.
>
> This is where Andrew's notion of outreach would be absolutely requisite to
> determine if disassociation is enough. It might even require sponsorship.
>
> We'd need careful wordsmithing.
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 05:03 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
>
> > I think we all vastly underestimate the ripple effect such a change might
> > have.
> > I do understand some of the sentiments of people who want change.
> >
> > However, maybe there is an easier way to handle this issue.
> >
> > Do we really have to change the name or just disassociate with the
> > Apache Tribe ? I think the latter does not need name change and will
> > be few orders of magnitude easier and possible to do in a few months
> > rather than decades.
> >
> > For the vast majority of people in the software industry I think, the
> > "Apache Software Foundation" bears absolutely no relation to the
> > Apache Tribe. Why would it? Yeah originally it was a homage to some of
> > the qualities of the Apache Tribe as the origin of the name is, and we
> > do have the Feather which somewhat relates to the tribe. But for all
> > practical purposes and mental association there is no relation between
> > the two.
> >
> > I've been working in a trademark office for some time and from how I
> > understand how names and brands are considered and used - "brands" and
> > "names" can only be reserved in the "scope" they are registered for.
> > So all Apache brand and naming is valid in "software" (and there the
> > foundation obviously is associated with the name) - but there is
> > nothing wrong (at least in the brand/trademark world) to have another
> > "Apache" registered for another business (think Helicopters). Of
> > course tribe is not a business, but I think the laws of trademark are
> > simply reflecting the way people think about names and brands.
> >
> > While originally people who created The ASF have thought about some
> > qualities associated with the Apache Tribe, true, but I think this was
> > a very "loose" connection. Over the years Apache and The ASF actually
> > "created from scratch" the meaning of the "Apache" word in the
> > software industry. In this industry there is no "Apache Tribe" and
> > never was, there is no other "Apache". What's even more - those
> > qualities and properties chosen back there are not even the ones that
> > bind the Apache Software Foundation together ("community over code").
> > I think there was no real bad effect in the past that ASF would
> > somewhat create for the tribe, but - more importantly - there was no
> > piggy-backing I think. Since the name Apache was not really known in
> > the industry, and the association with the Tribe was mostly in the
> > minds of the people who created it and not in the minds of the users,
> > you cannot really say that the ASF "abused" the name to build its
> > position or otherwise build its reputation based on the Tribe itself.
> > In a way it was just a name, one of many, that people creating the ASF
> > could choose, and it was more for them than for the external world.
> > Then they worked 20 years to build the quality and reputation of the
> > "Apache" name in the software industry - without any piggybacking or
> > abusing of the association, I think. So in a way expecting to throw
> > back these 20 years of brand-building in a completely new industry is
> > not really too "symmetrical" I believe.
> >
> > Since the connection is so "loose", I would say we have the option to
> > simply formally disassociate the meaning from the Tribe but leave the
> > name Apache with the foundation.
> >
> > Why don't we simply:
> >
> > * change the explanation of the name (And figure out some nice acronym
> > that APACHE might stand for - we can even vote on some proposals
> > there).
> > * remove the Feather from the logo and replace it with something more
> > abstract (yet another opportunity to get some members energized around
> > proposing and voting for a new logo)
> > * ask the few projects that might get an explicit association with the
> > Tribe (Arrow? Geronimo?) to change their names - that will be
> > immensely easier than changing the Foundation name
> > * to formally disassociate the meaning while also adding a homage for
> > the past association to the Tribe while we are separating the meaning
> >
> > Of course - maybe I just do not understand the feelings, and desired
> > of those who feel strongly about the association, but I think the fact
> > of life is that the same names might mean different things, and in the
> > software industry "Apache" is the foundation. In the "People's"
> > business - it's the Tribe. Why don't we formally separate those two
> > simply?
> >
> > J.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 1:31 AM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > 100% with you about the mechanics of a poll.
> > >
> > > It is absolutely necessary to have a clearly defined goal, hypothesis,
> > etc. before we can drive a poll. I think coming up with those questions
> is
> > part of what we’re chatting about. That in itself can be a challenge. I
> > agree about multiple options. (That’s where I was going w/ a Likert
> scale).
> > >
> > > In terms of LOE, there might be ways to mitigate some of the burden.
> DEI
> > efforts have never been as important to people as they are right now.
> There
> > are a lot of orgs willing to invest in that. Fundraising can easily turn
> > into contracting fees. (I also work for a pretty large global consultancy
> > whose core values are heavily focused on DEI, I’d be happy to socialize
> the
> > effort. PMs, Devs, UX, CX, and so on. )
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 18:21:26
> > > To: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > >
> > > Schools and sports teams changing their names is trivial in comparison
> > > to the scope of work here. How many schools or sports teams have their
> > > name as part of APIs? This is on the level of deprecating .com in DNS
> > > in favor of something else.
> > >
> > > The concrete ideas like a new logo sound far more tractable, as would
> > > things like no longer allowing new ASF projects to name themselves
> > > after native culture.
> > >
> > > As for a poll about willingness to change the name, I don't think
> > > there will be useful results from such a poll without a more specific
> > > set of questions. Perhaps aiming it towards a spectrum of options on
> > > how to proceed with one end being no change and the other end being
> > > full rename could be useful? For example, suppose there's much more
> > > support in doing something like a logo change versus a name change; it
> > > wouldn't be productive to poll about binary options as we wouldn't be
> > > able to figure out which options may already be widely supported.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 4:10 PM Walter Cameron
> > > <wa...@waltercameron.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm encouraged by the appetite for change expressed here, gunalchéesh
> > to
> > > > everyone for hearing me out and sharing your ideas and fleshing out
> > more of
> > > > a plan.
> > > >
> > > > I agree with everyone here that it’s a mountain of work to change the
> > name,
> > > > it took years to get us to this point and Myrle is right it will take
> > > > decades to correct. I’ll do whatever I can and I’m sure others will
> > also
> > > > but decolonizing open source will take generations. It took the
> > Washington
> > > > Football Team a few seasons to pick a new name. I’m not saying a
> > stopgap
> > > > name is needed, but maybe just a commitment to changing the name from
> > the
> > > > membership could be a first point added to Myrle's outline. My gut
> also
> > > > says that despite the work, even the larger software community would
> > > > welcome a new name.
> > > >
> > > > I think Ed is right that educating and driving the community to enact
> > > > change will be a group effort. Maybe if a vote or poll of the
> > membership
> > > > indicated an openness to change that would encourage further effort
> and
> > > > volunteers to do the work. I know I’ve been in a lot of groups where
> > people
> > > > knowingly went down the wrong path just because they thought that’s
> > what
> > > > the group wanted, when really everyone was just following everyone
> > else and
> > > > maybe ASF’s branding is just such a situation.
> > > >
> > > > Walter
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:44 PM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I’m also willing to take on some of the tasks. I do want to point
> > out that
> > > > > if we over-decompose the problem, we’re just going to push the
> > perception
> > > > > of it being one problem that is too big to too many problems. Many
> > of the
> > > > > tasks and work are going to fail into categories, and there are
> > going to be
> > > > > many different ways to categorize the problems (hopefully to
> > minimize the
> > > > > impact of some of those dependencies).
> > > > >
> > > > > I’m curious why there has to be one single person to “drive” the
> > effort.
> > > > > If we have a sufficient number of people (but not too many) that
> are
> > > > > willing to take on some of the tasks, why can’t those tasks be to
> > drive it
> > > > > by committee?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org>
> > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 15:35:06
> > > > > To: Community <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > >
> > > > > Walter,
> > > > >
> > > > > The assertion that we have paid staff, while correct, isn't
> > particularly
> > > > > relevant to the question. All of the top level leadership positions
> > at
> > > > > The
> > > > > Foundation are unpaid volunteer roles, including
> > > > > * President,
> > > > > * Executive Vice President,
> > > > > * VP Infra,
> > > > > * VP Brand,
> > > > > * VP Fundraising,
> > > > > * Treasurer,
> > > > > * VP Legal,
> > > > > * VP Conferences,
> > > > > * VP Privacy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Contractors have contracts with (more or less) well-defined scopes
> > that
> > > > > can't be expanded to include this kind of ad hoc work, without
> > contract
> > > > > negotiations, and added costs.
> > > > >
> > > > > All of these volunteers are doing this work in their free time
> while
> > also
> > > > > doing the work the use to put food on their family's tables.
> > > > >
> > > > > That having been said, my gut tells me that the majority of The
> > > > > Foundation
> > > > > members agree that the name is sub-optimal. People just don't know
> > how to
> > > > > fix it. IMO: The first step would be to break the change you are
> > asking
> > > > > for down into steps small enough that people can imagine taking
> them
> > on,
> > > > > or
> > > > > that it is possible to contract out under the oversight of a
> > volunteer.
> > > > > Y'all check me, but I see:
> > > > >
> > > > > * Picking a new name and achieving consensus that it's the right
> > name.
> > > > > * Legally changing the name of The Foundation itself.
> > > > > * Understanding how this affects the many business relationships
> the
> > > > > Foundation has, and mitigating those effects.
> > > > > * Designing new names and logos for the many brands The Foundation
> > owns,
> > > > > including project branding (eg "Apache Cassandra") the feather
> logo,
> > the
> > > > > incubator logo, etc.
> > > > > * Registering a new website domain.
> > > > > * Namespaces/packages/artifact names/etc in The Foundation's many
> > > > > projects.
> > > > > * Getting OSI approval for a new license identical to "Apache
> License
> > > > > 2.0",
> > > > > but under a new name. Getting that new license listed in various
> > license
> > > > > pickers.
> > > > > * Marketing the new name so that it reaches a similar level of
> > > > > recognition
> > > > > as the old name.
> > > > > * ...all the things I didn't think of.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some of this work will cross multiple jurisdictions. For example
> > there
> > > > > has
> > > > > already been significant effort that I don't fully understand
> > > > > establishing
> > > > > Apache branding in China. Those efforts would have to be restarted.
> > You'd
> > > > > need to get support from our Chinese members.
> > > > >
> > > > > There are dependencies between some of these items. For example,
> you
> > > > > should get a new website domain before you can change artifact
> names.
> > > > > Possibly you would leave old artifacts with the old name, and only
> > use
> > > > > the
> > > > > new name for new artifacts.
> > > > >
> > > > > Each of these tasks would touch a different set of areas of The
> > > > > Foundation. For example, legally changing the Foundation's name
> would
> > > > > fall
> > > > > under VP Legal. Infra would have to register new domain names, and
> > set up
> > > > > redirects, including to the ApacheCon domains. VP Conferences would
> > have
> > > > > to adjust the conference branding. VP Fundraising might need to
> > notify
> > > > > all
> > > > > of our sponsors. etc. All in all this would be thousands of hours
> of
> > > > > work, that would need coordinating across multiple volunteers who
> are
> > > > > interested in doing a good job, but not necessarily able to respond
> > to
> > > > > tasks on deadlines. And at the end it would certainly be impossible
> > to
> > > > > fully complete it, because for example, changing package names
> would
> > > > > break
> > > > > client code.
> > > > >
> > > > > Despite the complexity of the full change, some of these tasks are
> > > > > independent of the others and can be taken on without an
> expectation
> > that
> > > > > all tasks would be completed. For example, registering a new domain
> > name,
> > > > > and developing a consensus that it can be used instead of "apache"
> > in new
> > > > > projects might be possible without doing a full-on name change.
> > > > > Introducing the same license under a new name might also be
> > possible. And
> > > > > replacing our logo with something more respectful might also be
> > possible
> > > > > without touching anything else. To tease out tasks like this would
> > > > > require
> > > > > someone with an interest in doing the hard work of decomposing the
> > > > > problem,
> > > > > discovering which pieces are independently solvable, developing
> > consensus
> > > > > that a change should be made, and then doing each change itself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please recognize that to fully complete what I'm describing here
> will
> > > > > take
> > > > > years, possibly more than a decade of work, and that it will
> probably
> > > > > never
> > > > > be fully completed, and that it will require buy-in from hundreds,
> > > > > possibly
> > > > > thousands of people. To achieve full buy-in, you'd need to convince
> > > > > people
> > > > > not only that the work is worth doing, but also that you are in it
> > for as
> > > > > long as the task will take. With all that as context: if someone is
> > > > > willing to do that work of driving that effort, then I'm willing to
> > take
> > > > > on
> > > > > some individual tasks in the process that fall within my area of
> > > > > expertise. But I personally am not willing to *drive* that effort,
> > and I
> > > > > haven't seen that anyone else is willing to either.
> > > > >
> > > > > Walter, when someone replies "You want this change, but are you
> > willing
> > > > > to
> > > > > do the work?" this may be what they are asking. Despite all of
> that,
> > your
> > > > > statements about the disrespect of the name and the logos, and some
> > of
> > > > > the
> > > > > project names are valid. The hurt you describe is real. And I wish
> it
> > > > > weren't so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > Myrle Krantz
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 8:24 PM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think it would be useful to poll ASF members' opinions. This
> > would
> > > > > > not be a vote (in the sense that any action would result if the
> > vote
> > > > > > 'passes') even though we may choose to implement the poll using
> > STevE
> > > > > > during a members meeting. It would allow us to gauge where
> opinions
> > > > > > are, and track changes in members' opinions over time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As others have noted, a discussion followed by a vote would
> likely
> > be
> > > > > > divisive, because the discussion would be dominated by those with
> > the
> > > > > > most polarized opinions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Julian
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:36 AM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks Sam and Andrew for helping provide visibility!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > From: Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
> > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 13:35:41
> > > > > > > To: Apache Community Dev <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Moving board to bcc. Mixing public and private mailing lists is
> > not a
> > > > > > > good idea.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:48 PM Andrew Musselman <
> > akm@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Copying them now.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 9:46 AM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > @Andrew,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > How do we engage the board?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ed Mangini
> > > > > > > > > me@emangini.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Musselman <ak...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 12:44:28
> > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 8:28 AM me <me...@emangini.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Andrew,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I agree that putting it to a member vote is possibly
> > polarizing
> > > > > > (and
> > > > > > > > > > premature). That’s not really the intent here. A poll is
> a
> > > > > dipstick
> > > > > > > > > effort
> > > > > > > > > > to check the temperature before we reach strategy and
> > tactics.
> > > > > > Polling
> > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > more about discovery.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think you'll get a similar reaction from a poll.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I personally think a poll is premature. At the moment, you
> don't
> > have
> > > > > > > a proposed name, scope, or size of effort. Without a
> definition,
> > it
> > > > > > > isn't clear what people will be expressing support for (or
> > against).
> > > > > > > It is OK to leave some parts TBD for a poll, but for a poll to
> be
> > > > > > > useful there needs to be some substance.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I’m all for the outreach. For my own clarification, are
> you
> > > > > > looking at
> > > > > > > > > > this as a means of defining boundaries on the effort,
> > setting
> > > > > > urgency
> > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > the efforts (or some combination of both?)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think this is such an expansive and encompassing topic
> that
> > > > > covers
> > > > > > > > > almost
> > > > > > > > > every aspect of the operations of the foundation that it
> > might be
> > > > > > smart
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > the board to have a look and build up a plan before doing
> > any ad
> > > > > hoc
> > > > > > > > > outreach.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Is this something you’re willing to do or kick off?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I personally don't have bandwidth to participate in
> > activities on
> > > > > > this,
> > > > > > > > > no.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Is there any reason why we can’t move forward with both a
> > poll
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > outreach?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Again I think this is a board decision but I am not a
> lawyer.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Board decision will come much later. Meanwhile, many board
> > members
> > > > > > > watch this list.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Sam Ruby
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Musselman <ak...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 10:14:05
> > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Cc: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Speaking as someone in the Pacific Northwest US, where we
> > say
> > > > > land
> > > > > > > > > > acknowledgement for the Duwamish tribe at the beginning
> of
> > all
> > > > > > school
> > > > > > > > > > events, meaning I respect and understand the motivation
> for
> > > > > this:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think simply opening this up for a member vote will
> > result in
> > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > unproductive firefight. Reactions will range from
> > enthusiastic
> > > > > > sympathy
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > bewildered annoyance to outright hostile accusations.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Can I propose an outreach to some Apache tribe
> governments
> > so
> > > > > we
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > open
> > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > dialog with them directly, and start to understand what
> > their
> > > > > > official
> > > > > > > > > > experience of the ASF branding is?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Then we could formulate a plan after some deliberation.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > The plan could include logo redesign if the feather
> symbol
> > is
> > > > > > viewed as
> > > > > > > > > > insensitive, for example, and other changes balanced with
> > > > > > feasibility
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > community values.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Best
> > > > > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 6:29 AM me <me...@emangini.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > @Christian
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > You’re very welcome! I think an internal poll has a
> > great way
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > defining
> > > > > > > > > > > footholds. It’s going to be hard to craft to avoid
> > > > > confirmation
> > > > > > bias,
> > > > > > > > > > but I
> > > > > > > > > > > think it’s definitely possible.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > @Matt
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I agree. There is no doubt that this is something that
> > would
> > > > > > require
> > > > > > > > > > > stages. Approaching this “Big Bang” style is going to
> > fail
> > > > > pretty
> > > > > > > > > > quickly.
> > > > > > > > > > > I’m thinking the effort is going to be an amalgam of
> the
> > > > > > Washington
> > > > > > > > > > > Redskins -> Commanders effort + the migration from
> JUnit
> > 4 to
> > > > > 5.
> > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > > definitely hits on the “strategic” aspect of Sam’s
> > initial
> > > > > > questions.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I think we can probably differentiate a brand change
> and
> > a
> > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > > separate efforts (or at the very least separate life
> > cycles).
> > > > > > Large
> > > > > > > > > > > organizations that acquire startups and small companies
> > often
> > > > > > rebrand
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > acquired assets and their products to better fit their
> > > > > > business/tech
> > > > > > > > > > > strategy. However, underlying assets (repos, docs,
> > materials)
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > retrofit
> > > > > > > > > > > at a slower burn.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I think the first action item is probably a poll. I’m
> > happy
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > pair/mob
> > > > > > > > > > > (virtually or otherwise) on it with someone. Are there
> > any
> > > > > > particular
> > > > > > > > > > > psychometrics we’d like to leverage (i.e. Likert?)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > @Walter, do you want to take a first stab at a poll?
> > Maybe we
> > > > > > can put
> > > > > > > > > > > together a small tiger team to carry it out?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > From: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 28, 2022 at 18:45:07
> > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Defining a scope here is also fairly important. For
> > example,
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > apache.org domain name is fairly baked into a lot of
> > > > > > unchangeable
> > > > > > > > > > > places such as Java package names, every single
> released
> > > > > > artifact,
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > software license itself (which is used by tons of
> people
> > > > > outside
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > ASF), all the existing public URLs to things, email
> > > > > addresses,
> > > > > > > > > signing
> > > > > > > > > > > keys, the GitHub organization name, tons of
> > infrastructure
> > > > > > > > > > > configuration, finance documents, corporate documents,
> > > > > > trademarks,
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > surely other areas I'm forgetting.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > If we have a name change and only update the places
> where
> > > > > it's
> > > > > > easy
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > do so, the name Apache will still be highly visible in
> > tons
> > > > > of
> > > > > > key
> > > > > > > > > > > areas for the indefinite future. This isn't even
> > considering
> > > > > > > > > > > downstream users of Apache software, either, who may or
> > may
> > > > > not
> > > > > > adopt
> > > > > > > > > > > a rename. These are some of the fairly intractable
> > concerns
> > > > > I've
> > > > > > had
> > > > > > > > > > > about a name change, and that's even after working with
> > > > > another
> > > > > > OSS
> > > > > > > > > > > project that went through a name change and still has
> > tons of
> > > > > > > > > > > references to its old names due to compatibility
> issues.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 3:49 PM Christian Grobmeier
> > > > > > > > > > > <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, at 22:19, me wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Christian,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Were you thinking of an internal poll? That’s
> > actually a
> > > > > > > > > > spectacular
> > > > > > > > > > > idea.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that was I was thinking. Basically a poll on
> > members@,
> > > > >
> > > > > > since
> > > > > > > > > (I
> > > > > > > > > > > guess) members would eventually decide on that
> proposal.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > How do we go about kicking that off?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I am not so sure either, but I guess writing the poll
> > and
> > > > > > proposing
> > > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > to community@ would be a first step. Once decided on
> the
> > > > > > content we
> > > > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > vote on sending it, and then send it to members@
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Others may have different ideas, but that is my first
> > idea
> > > > > on
> > > > > > it.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for calling my idea spectacular, it gives me a
> > warm
> > > > > > feeling,
> > > > > > > > > > > since I didn't think of it as such :)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > Christian
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed Mangini
> > > > > > > > > > > > > me@emangini.com
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 28, 2022 at 15:43:04
> > > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <
> > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hello,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, at 20:57, me wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > The desire to make the change is definitely
> > there. I
> > > > > echo
> > > > > > > > > > Walter’s
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > passion and statements.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I also agree w/ Sam that this isn’t going to be
> > easy
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > accomplish.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Perhaps a starting point would be to answer
> these
> > > > > > questions in
> > > > > > > > > > > concert:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - what is the LOE to perform the
> > rebranding/renaming?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - are there enough volunteers within the
> > organization
> > > > > > willing
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > participate?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - what does the community think?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I want to emphasize that this last question is a
> > point
> > > > > of
> > > > > > no
> > > > > > > > > > > return. If
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > we start creating surveys and asking about our
> > brand,
> > > > > it’s
> > > > > > > > > going
> > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > chum the waters.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Agreed. I would have thought to make a poll in the
> > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > first-
> > > > > > > > > > > briefly explain the issue and see what the community
> > > > > > (non-binding)
> > > > > > > > > vote
> > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > - just checking sentiments.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> I am afraid there will be a lot of headwinds. But
> > based
> > > > > on
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > outcome one could decide if its more work to explain
> the
> > issue
> > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > actually
> > > > > > > > > > > solve the issue.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Also a quick poll could stir up some people who
> are
> > > > > > interested
> > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > helping.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Cheers,
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> Christian
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > From: Walter Cameron <
> > walter.lists@waltercameron.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > > > dev@community.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Date: April 28, 2022 at 01:29:03
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > To: dev@community.apache.org <
> > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 6:40 PM Sam Ruby <
> > > > > > > > > rubys@intertwingly.net>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> Walter: what are you personally willing to
> > volunteer
> > > > > to
> > > > > > do?
> > > > > > > > > > What
> > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> your plan? What resources do you need?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Honestly Sam the extent of my plan was to bring
> > > > > attention
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > issue and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > the harms it’s caused. Beyond that I’m kinda
> > winging
> > > > > it
> > > > > > but I
> > > > > > > > > > > appreciate
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > your eagerness and openness to change. I had
> > hoped I’d
> > > > > > speak
> > > > > > > > > up,
> > > > > > > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > would finally pull their heads out of the sand
> > and work
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > undo
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > harm
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > they’ve caused.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > ASF’s brand violates its own CoC. You would
> think
> > that
> > > > > > might
> > > > > > > > > > spur
> > > > > > > > > > > effort
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > for change by those perpetuating the harm, but
> if
> > you
> > > > > > want me
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > work I’ll do whatever I can. I’m not that
> familiar
> > > > > with
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > details
> > > > > > > > > > > of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > organization, surely not as familiar as one of
> its
> > > > > > Directors,
> > > > > > > > > so
> > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > a lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > of ways I don’t fully understand the scope of
> what
> > > > > needs
> > > > > > to be
> > > > > > > > > > > done, but
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I’m willing to volunteer a few weekends of my
> > > > > rudimentary
> > > > > > > > > > technical
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > design skills to run a “Find & Replace…” and put
> > > > > together
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > > > > logo or
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > whatever you think would be helpful in this
> > effort. I
> > > > > > haven’t
> > > > > > > > > > > designed a
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > logo in probably 15 years but I’m willing to
> give
> > it a
> > > > > > try.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I would have assumed that an organization with a
> > paid
> > > > > > staff
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > goals to
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > increase the diversity of its contributors and
> > > > > continue
> > > > > > > > > > receiving
> > > > > > > > > > > corporate
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > donations would understand that the costs of
> > inaction
> > > > > > outweigh
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > costs of
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > action here.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Let me know what else I can do to help.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Walter
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > > > dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > > dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Walter Cameron <wa...@waltercameron.com>.
> Why "others"?
>
> My hot button is when people use the words like "they" and "others".
> The ASF is the set of people who show up to do the work. As such it
> is constantly growing and shrinking as new people show up and others
> move on to other things.
>
> If you are sincere about being willing to do the work, then you are part
of us.
I apologize for my tone, I have made a deliberate effort in the past to
separate myself from ASF rhetorically because of how uncomfortable I’ve
been with the brand. I’ve heard the terms “Apache developer” and “Apache
people” used when referring to people in this community and as a Tlingit
developer I’m hesitant to assume a Native-themed identity that isn’t my own.
It’s really not the most collaborative attitude and I’ll try to be more
inclusive in my discussions from here on.
> If option 3 is your choice, then I suppose the next step is working with
> members of ASF to determine specific scope of work?
Yeah that sounds good to me. Myrle broke down some steps for us earlier:
> * Picking a new name and achieving consensus that it's the right name.
> * Legally changing the name of The Foundation itself.
> * Understanding how this affects the many business relationships the
> Foundation has, and mitigating those effects.
> * Designing new names and logos for the many brands The Foundation owns,
> including project branding (eg "Apache Cassandra") the feather logo, the
> incubator logo, etc.
> * Registering a new website domain.
> * Namespaces/packages/artifact names/etc in The Foundation's many
projects.
> * Getting OSI approval for a new license identical to "Apache License
2.0",
> but under a new name. Getting that new license listed in various license
> pickers.
> * Marketing the new name so that it reaches a similar level of recognition
> as the old name.
> * ...all the things I didn't think of.
* Picking a new name and achieving consensus that it's the right name.
I feel like we’re at this point and progress is maybe being blocked by our
lack of new name suggestions. Does anyone have any ideas for a name? I know
Ed said something earlier about using the term “First”, is there anything
we can do with that?
On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 6:36 PM Ed Mangini <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> I don't think Walters use of "others" is intended to pass the buck.
> @Walter, I'm assuming that your intent was to better understand the process
> and scope of "how do I make a change in the ASF"?
>
> I think we agree this is a big task, regardless of avenue.
>
>
> My intent was mostly to gauge/rally interest in a direction that is likely
> to gain the most support and volunteers.
>
> If option 3 is your choice, then I suppose the next step is working with
> members of ASF to determine specific scope of work? It's probably worth
> identifying blockers up front and evaluating those before starting to apply
> elbow grease.
>
> On Tue, May 3, 2022, 18:18 Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 5:49 PM Walter Cameron
> > <wa...@waltercameron.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > My homework above was all about gathering more data to help others
> make a
> > > decision, but if there’s already an agreement on what needs to be done
> > and
> > > the board or membership is willing make a change without a poll or vote
> > > that’s fine with me, I’m all for getting to the action if change is
> > already
> > > what’s agreed on here. I’m just trying to work with whatever options
> are
> > > available to me.
> >
> > Why "others"?
> >
> > My hot button is when people use the words like "they" and "others".
> > The ASF is the set of people who show up to do the work. As such it
> > is constantly growing and shrinking as new people show up and others
> > move on to other things.
> >
> > If you are sincere about being willing to do the work, then you are part
> > of us.
> >
> > - Sam Ruby
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Ed Mangini <me...@emangini.com>.
I don't think Walters use of "others" is intended to pass the buck.
@Walter, I'm assuming that your intent was to better understand the process
and scope of "how do I make a change in the ASF"?
I think we agree this is a big task, regardless of avenue.
My intent was mostly to gauge/rally interest in a direction that is likely
to gain the most support and volunteers.
If option 3 is your choice, then I suppose the next step is working with
members of ASF to determine specific scope of work? It's probably worth
identifying blockers up front and evaluating those before starting to apply
elbow grease.
On Tue, May 3, 2022, 18:18 Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 5:49 PM Walter Cameron
> <wa...@waltercameron.com> wrote:
> >
> > My homework above was all about gathering more data to help others make a
> > decision, but if there’s already an agreement on what needs to be done
> and
> > the board or membership is willing make a change without a poll or vote
> > that’s fine with me, I’m all for getting to the action if change is
> already
> > what’s agreed on here. I’m just trying to work with whatever options are
> > available to me.
>
> Why "others"?
>
> My hot button is when people use the words like "they" and "others".
> The ASF is the set of people who show up to do the work. As such it
> is constantly growing and shrinking as new people show up and others
> move on to other things.
>
> If you are sincere about being willing to do the work, then you are part
> of us.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
>
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 5:49 PM Walter Cameron
<wa...@waltercameron.com> wrote:
>
> My homework above was all about gathering more data to help others make a
> decision, but if there’s already an agreement on what needs to be done and
> the board or membership is willing make a change without a poll or vote
> that’s fine with me, I’m all for getting to the action if change is already
> what’s agreed on here. I’m just trying to work with whatever options are
> available to me.
Why "others"?
My hot button is when people use the words like "they" and "others".
The ASF is the set of people who show up to do the work. As such it
is constantly growing and shrinking as new people show up and others
move on to other things.
If you are sincere about being willing to do the work, then you are part of us.
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Walter Cameron <wa...@waltercameron.com>.
Hi Sam, thank you for your prompt reply.
> There is no "they" here. If this is a topic that is important to you,
> show up. Do the work. Don't blame others for not doing your homework
> for you, or for not doing what you, yourself, are not willing to do.
I suppose my attempts are being misunderstood as I am showing up here to do
the work as this topic is important to me. The homework I was trying to
solve is who is Director Fielding referring to in his past statements, and
who are the people being referenced on the `/apache-name` page? It didn’t
seem productive to email Roy privately as the board has been CC’d to this
thread as I understand it and the GitHub history wasn’t illuminating but I
can reach out to the original committer of the page. As part of my homework
I was hoping to get the perspectives of the people in this community who
were around for the history being referenced but if that’s inappropriate
for this venue I can pursue others.
> And, in case you are wondering, I am not a fan of polling
> non-participants. Particularly if that is being proposed instead of
> doing what actually needs to be done.
My homework above was all about gathering more data to help others make a
decision, but if there’s already an agreement on what needs to be done and
the board or membership is willing make a change without a poll or vote
that’s fine with me, I’m all for getting to the action if change is already
what’s agreed on here. I’m just trying to work with whatever options are
available to me.
> I'll make a prediction: if people actually do show up and do the work
> (and by that I mean along the lines of how Ed Mangini has been
> proposing), the board will approve the results.
>
> But until then, don't ignore Ed's question, namely "Do we have someone
> who can take this on?" and then lament that people aren't answering
> your question.
Maybe I’m unclear as to Ed’s intent, but my understanding of his idea was
to reach out to an Apache nation or organization to facilitate a dialogue.
I didn’t ignore it and instead I replied, pointing out the complexities of
such an endeavor.
I spent my next two emails trying to point out that understanding the harm
of stereotypes isn’t about going out and finding one person who is ok with
something to determine if it’s harmful or not, rather it’s about listening
to people and using your own sense of reason and compassion to understand.
I’m not interested in taking on the work of looking for someone who says
ASF’s mascotry is ok while ignoring everyone past and present who says
otherwise. Is that the only path forward right now? I feel there is a
logical flaw to the endeavor. If I’m misunderstanding something or you have
other suggestions I’m all ears.
Gunalchéesh,
Walter
On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 12:44 PM Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 4:20 PM Walter Cameron
> <wa...@waltercameron.com> wrote:
> >
> > Considering the lack of responses to my questions about the history here,
> > I’m going to assume ASF has ignored past complaints similar to how
> they’ve
> > ignored my own.
>
> There is no "they" here. If this is a topic that is important to you,
> show up. Do the work. Don't blame others for not doing your homework
> for you, or for not doing what you, yourself, are not willing to do.
>
> And, in case you are wondering, I am not a fan of polling
> non-participants. Particularly if that is being proposed instead of
> doing what actually needs to be done.
>
> I'll make a prediction: if people actually do show up and do the work
> (and by that I mean along the lines of how Ed Mangini has been
> proposing), the board will approve the results.
>
> But until then, don't ignore Ed's question, namely "Do we have someone
> who can take this on?" and then lament that people aren't answering
> your question.
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> P.S. No, I'm not signing up to do this work. But if people do show
> up and encounter road-blocks, let me know and I'll see what I can do
> to clear the path for you to proceed.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
>
>
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Tue, May 3, 2022 at 4:20 PM Walter Cameron
<wa...@waltercameron.com> wrote:
>
> Considering the lack of responses to my questions about the history here,
> I’m going to assume ASF has ignored past complaints similar to how they’ve
> ignored my own.
There is no "they" here. If this is a topic that is important to you,
show up. Do the work. Don't blame others for not doing your homework
for you, or for not doing what you, yourself, are not willing to do.
And, in case you are wondering, I am not a fan of polling
non-participants. Particularly if that is being proposed instead of
doing what actually needs to be done.
I'll make a prediction: if people actually do show up and do the work
(and by that I mean along the lines of how Ed Mangini has been
proposing), the board will approve the results.
But until then, don't ignore Ed's question, namely "Do we have someone
who can take this on?" and then lament that people aren't answering
your question.
- Sam Ruby
P.S. No, I'm not signing up to do this work. But if people do show
up and encounter road-blocks, let me know and I'll see what I can do
to clear the path for you to proceed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Walter Cameron <wa...@waltercameron.com>.
Considering the lack of responses to my questions about the history here,
I’m going to assume ASF has ignored past complaints similar to how they’ve
ignored my own. I feel like a lot of this discussion has centered around
the idea that the offensiveness of mascotry can be gauged with some kind of
OR gate, that if just one person or organization can be found that is ok
with it, then there is no problem, ignoring everyone else who may be
impacted by the stereotyping.
An example might be the tomahawk chop, it originated at FSU, which gets
special blessing from the Seminole Tribe of Florida (there is also the
Seminole Nation of Oklahoma) to use Native-themed imagery. I know a lot of
Natives myself included who feel the chop is racist regardless of any other
endorsements. The tomahawk chop has spread further to other teams like the
Braves and the Chiefs (teams without any kind of endorsement), and pops up
in other anti-Indigenous expressions at protests and political events.
In a similar fashion I don’t think it can be disputed that Apache webserver
inspired the very ugly appropriation and stereotyping in other web projects
like the Hiawatha webserver and the Tomahawk node.js project.
On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 2:59 AM Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> This is in stark contrast with many other companies and organisations
> which made a lot of internalisation and externalisation of their
> branding and names. As an example - I have been for a while working at
> Snowflake and there are lots and lots and lots of internalisation and
> externalisation of "snow and snowflake" down to the internal use of
> ”fresh snow" when people are hired or "it's snowing in Warsaw" public
> slogan when our company was acquired. The ASF does nothing of that
> whatsoever.
I would argue that ASF does exactly the same in its marketing. For example
the “Trillions and Trillions Served” commercial that’s on the front-page of
apache.org. You’d never know just from watching it that it was filmed at an
Apachecon Europe in Berlin as well as an Apachecon in Vegas. Much of it
appears to take place in a John Oliver-esque void, but the introduction is
very deliberate to use scenery of the desert southwest to set the tone of
the film. There’s no nice accompanying European scenery to show how this is
a global organization, instead there are only sweeping views of stolen
Native American land. It makes a deliberate statement of Americanness.
That’s the problem with using a name like this, what other creative well to
draw from does ASF even have for marketing? As innocent seeming or
respectful as the intents might be, at the end of the day it’s still going
to be redface.
In that same video you’ll see Brian describe “the last days of the Native
American tribe called the Apaches who succumbed to the invasion from the
west” as though these tribes and people no longer exist. From my
perspective as Indigenous person ASF doesn’t appear to have done even a
glancing effort at respecting or honoring the people that they claim to
represent.
The way I see it there are three outcomes people have discussed for how to
move forward, maybe these options could be the seed of a poll or vote?
1). Keep the name and Native-theme. (Status quo)
2). Keep the name but remove the Native-theme. (How?)
3). Remove the name and change the brand entirely.
Most of the arguments in this thread arguing for the status quo revolved
around the idea that ASF is honorably doing its mascotry and that ASF and
Indigenous values line up so completely there are no problems with
identifying as Apache. I obviously disagree with these sentiments, but many
might not.
I don’t believe 2) is even possible, it just seems like just further
can-kicking on 3), but 3) is considered hard and 2) may appear more
approachable but I don’t believe ASF can fully dissociate or erase any
Indigenous connections to the term. As I’ve said before the label for this
is called Indigenous erasure.
As I’m sure you’ve all guessed I’m firmly in camp three. Am I missing any
options here?
On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 9:23 PM Walter Cameron <
walter.lists@waltercameron.com> wrote:
> In the interest of gathering data on the impact of the name beyond my own
> personal experience and understanding, is anyone aware of the details of
> past complaints about the name?
>
> Researching this topic I stumbled across a decade old thread that makes a
> lot of incorrect claims as I understand them about the term Apache but also
> says that people have spoken out before claiming to be Apache
> representatives:
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/9mjrmp1omw5rblt6dklktp1w0pn2p7mp can
> anyone shine any light on the complaints referenced in here?
>
> Also ASF’s page https://www.apache.org/apache-name/ says:
>
> > On occasion, we have been asked about claims about use of the
> > “Apache” name by the Apache Native American communities.
>
> Unfortunately the page doesn’t provide further details. Does anyone have
> any more info about the history referenced on this page or any other
> dialogues that they’d be able to share and add some more data points to
> this discussion?
>
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Walter Cameron <wa...@waltercameron.com>.
In the interest of gathering data on the impact of the name beyond my own
personal experience and understanding, is anyone aware of the details of
past complaints about the name?
Researching this topic I stumbled across a decade old thread that makes a
lot of incorrect claims as I understand them about the term Apache but also
says that people have spoken out before claiming to be Apache
representatives:
https://lists.apache.org/thread/9mjrmp1omw5rblt6dklktp1w0pn2p7mp can anyone
shine any light on the complaints referenced in here?
Also ASF’s page https://www.apache.org/apache-name/ says:
> On occasion, we have been asked about claims about use of the
> “Apache” name by the Apache Native American communities.
Unfortunately the page doesn’t provide further details. Does anyone have
any more info about the history referenced on this page or any other
dialogues that they’d be able to share and add some more data points to
this discussion?
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by me <me...@emangini.com>.
<div></div><div>Yeah. Very much agree with Owen.
<br/>
<br/>I think this is a very different situation than offensive use and
<br/>slogans. Also even if the association was in the minds of those who
<br/>started the ASF, it's missing even among the vast majority of the ASF
<br/>members. We cannot compare the sports teams which are actively
<br/>promoting their names and branding both internally and externally and
<br/>build "business" on using the names with the ASF that does not
<br/>actually do that at all. First - because there is no business to make,
<br/>and more importantly because the ASF simply does not use the Apache
<br/>name for any promotion - neither internalisation nor externalisation
<br/>of the name.
<br/>
<br/>I would say (of course I might not see perspective of all the people)
<br/>that the ripple effect on contributors does not exist, because ...
<br/>despite the official explanation of the origin and the feather - we,
<br/>the committers, contributors, PMC members and ASF members do not
<br/>consider ourselves as "Apache" people. We are members of the ASF which
<br/>does contain Apache in the name but we do not really claim or drive
<br/>any of our behaviours from the Tribe - and none of the ASF community
<br/>efforts have any notion of that. The ONLY loose relation is the
<br/>Feather. And while it might be somewhat difficult for ASF old-timers
<br/>to part with it - but for those who came later it's nothing but an
<br/>icon/logo that could be potentially replaced with another logo without
<br/>much of an impact. Just the fact that when we think (or at last it
<br/>looks like to me) that changing the Feather to something else is easy
<br/>and impact-less, means that we do not even think of ourselves as
<br/>"Apache's" in any way meaningful to the Tribe. And I think, this is
<br/>important that we do not have to even change this "thinking" as part
<br/>of any rebranding - because it is simply not there.
<br/>
<br/>This is in stark contrast with many other companies and organisations
<br/>which made a lot of internalisation and externalisation of their
<br/>branding and names. As an example - I have been for a while working at
<br/>Snowflake and there are lots and lots and lots of internalisation and
<br/>externalisation of "snow and snowflake" down to the internal use of
<br/>"fresh snow" when people are hired or "it's snowing in Warsaw" public
<br/>slogan when our company was acquired. The ASF does nothing of that
<br/>whatsoever.
<br/>
<br/>So really IMHO the Apache in the name of the ASF is just that - name
<br/>without the association.
<br/>
<br/>I seriously doubt a group of reasonable thinking individuals might
<br/>put-off by the fact that we "pretend" to be Apaches when we actually
<br/>don't. And - of course - we cannot please everyone, and there are some
<br/>people who might call it out in the name of political correctness.
<br/>This happens a lot of times nowadays. Both inside and outside people
<br/>might do it. It's inevitable and well - normal and there is nothing
<br/>wrong with that, to be honest. People have concerns, people express
<br/>them, and everyone is different, we have different backgrounds,
<br/>biases, opinions and associations in our heads. And we - as a group of
<br/>reasonable thinking members, should hear and listen to those voices.
<br/>
<br/>But also we should use our best judgment to see if those are real
<br/>problems or something that is really at most a slight annoyance for a
<br/>very small group of people and whether - by using the name we show any
<br/>disrespect or harm or even cut off ourselves from some opportunities
<br/>and people. There are (IMHO) no practical nor even emotional reasons
<br/>applicable to a wider or even quite small group of people in this case
<br/>that would justify the name change. Of course - we are not able to
<br/>satisfy everyone and respond to all individuals feeling differently,
<br/>but we can just do our best to show our respect and make a deliberate,
<br/>thoughtful discussion (like we do now :)) and carefully consider our
<br/>position, weight pros and cons and make a conscious decision as
<br/>members - what we do with those voices.
<br/>
<br/>I personally think (and when/if it comes to any voting that would be
<br/>my vote) that we do not show any disrespect or make any harm or even
<br/>put some people of if we stay with the Apache name as long as we
<br/>remove the association - which is a great opportunity as well to build
<br/>some engagement and common cause,
<br/>
<br/>Also when it comes to that I would love to be engaged and help in
<br/>making it happen in whatever way I might find myself useful - whatever
<br/>the directions the members choose.
<br/>
<br/>This is a good cause to spend time on. Showing respect and responding
<br/>(in reasonable scope) to concerns of people who feel bothered by the
<br/>current situation is cool. And a noble thing to do. We've been doing
<br/>it when we removed insensitive names from our code - eagerly - and
<br/>doing that for the ASF cause is really cool.
<br/>
<br/>J.
<br/>
<br/>On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 7:39 AM Owen Rubel <orubel@gmail.com> wrote:
<br/>>
<br/>> Well you may not need to.
<br/>>
<br/>> School and sports teams change their names because they are offensive and
<br/>> the tribe registers a complaint.
<br/>>
<br/>> In the sense of the Apache foundation, I sincerely donut the tribe will
<br/>> ever register an official complaint because it is a nonprofit that does
<br/>> community outreach and gives away software.
<br/>>
<br/>> They do not put the tribes image in a poor light nor do they use slogans,
<br/>> imagery that put the tribe in a poor light
<br/>>
<br/>> These are all things that would cause the Apache Nation to respond.
<br/>>
<br/>> The Apache Foundation has seemingly been a good steward so unless someone
<br/>> from the Apache Nation provides an official complaint, I would not worry.
<br/>>
<br/>> However... rebranding may be a good suggestion.
<br/>>
<br/>> Still some community outreach may be good so you can know if you even
<br/>> SHOULD start the path of rebranding; it may not even be necessary and you
<br/>> can put it to rest once and for all if they see you as good stewards.,
<br/>>
<br/>> Owen Rubel
<br/>> orubel@gmail.com
<br/>>
<br/>>
<br/>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 5:49 AM Ed Mangini <me@emangini.com> wrote:
<br/>>
<br/>> > Creative!
<br/>> >
<br/>> > How do we change the original intent?
<br/>> >
<br/>> > Our website directly references the Apache tribe, and that data point is
<br/>> > referenced in various web assets of which we have no control.
<br/>> >
<br/>> > This is where Andrew's notion of outreach would be absolutely requisite to
<br/>> > determine if disassociation is enough. It might even require sponsorship.
<br/>> >
<br/>> > We'd need careful wordsmithing.
<br/>> >
<br/>> >
<br/>> >
<br/>> >
<br/>> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 05:03 Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com> wrote:
<br/>> >
<br/>> > > I think we all vastly underestimate the ripple effect such a change might
<br/>> > > have.
<br/>> > > I do understand some of the sentiments of people who want change.
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > However, maybe there is an easier way to handle this issue.
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > Do we really have to change the name or just disassociate with the
<br/>> > > Apache Tribe ? I think the latter does not need name change and will
<br/>> > > be few orders of magnitude easier and possible to do in a few months
<br/>> > > rather than decades.
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > For the vast majority of people in the software industry I think, the
<br/>> > > "Apache Software Foundation" bears absolutely no relation to the
<br/>> > > Apache Tribe. Why would it? Yeah originally it was a homage to some of
<br/>> > > the qualities of the Apache Tribe as the origin of the name is, and we
<br/>> > > do have the Feather which somewhat relates to the tribe. But for all
<br/>> > > practical purposes and mental association there is no relation between
<br/>> > > the two.
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > I've been working in a trademark office for some time and from how I
<br/>> > > understand how names and brands are considered and used - "brands" and
<br/>> > > "names" can only be reserved in the "scope" they are registered for.
<br/>> > > So all Apache brand and naming is valid in "software" (and there the
<br/>> > > foundation obviously is associated with the name) - but there is
<br/>> > > nothing wrong (at least in the brand/trademark world) to have another
<br/>> > > "Apache" registered for another business (think Helicopters). Of
<br/>> > > course tribe is not a business, but I think the laws of trademark are
<br/>> > > simply reflecting the way people think about names and brands.
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > While originally people who created The ASF have thought about some
<br/>> > > qualities associated with the Apache Tribe, true, but I think this was
<br/>> > > a very "loose" connection. Over the years Apache and The ASF actually
<br/>> > > "created from scratch" the meaning of the "Apache" word in the
<br/>> > > software industry. In this industry there is no "Apache Tribe" and
<br/>> > > never was, there is no other "Apache". What's even more - those
<br/>> > > qualities and properties chosen back there are not even the ones that
<br/>> > > bind the Apache Software Foundation together ("community over code").
<br/>> > > I think there was no real bad effect in the past that ASF would
<br/>> > > somewhat create for the tribe, but - more importantly - there was no
<br/>> > > piggy-backing I think. Since the name Apache was not really known in
<br/>> > > the industry, and the association with the Tribe was mostly in the
<br/>> > > minds of the people who created it and not in the minds of the users,
<br/>> > > you cannot really say that the ASF "abused" the name to build its
<br/>> > > position or otherwise build its reputation based on the Tribe itself.
<br/>> > > In a way it was just a name, one of many, that people creating the ASF
<br/>> > > could choose, and it was more for them than for the external world.
<br/>> > > Then they worked 20 years to build the quality and reputation of the
<br/>> > > "Apache" name in the software industry - without any piggybacking or
<br/>> > > abusing of the association, I think. So in a way expecting to throw
<br/>> > > back these 20 years of brand-building in a completely new industry is
<br/>> > > not really too "symmetrical" I believe.
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > Since the connection is so "loose", I would say we have the option to
<br/>> > > simply formally disassociate the meaning from the Tribe but leave the
<br/>> > > name Apache with the foundation.
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > Why don't we simply:
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > * change the explanation of the name (And figure out some nice acronym
<br/>> > > that APACHE might stand for - we can even vote on some proposals
<br/>> > > there).
<br/>> > > * remove the Feather from the logo and replace it with something more
<br/>> > > abstract (yet another opportunity to get some members energized around
<br/>> > > proposing and voting for a new logo)
<br/>> > > * ask the few projects that might get an explicit association with the
<br/>> > > Tribe (Arrow? Geronimo?) to change their names - that will be
<br/>> > > immensely easier than changing the Foundation name
<br/>> > > * to formally disassociate the meaning while also adding a homage for
<br/>> > > the past association to the Tribe while we are separating the meaning
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > Of course - maybe I just do not understand the feelings, and desired
<br/>> > > of those who feel strongly about the association, but I think the fact
<br/>> > > of life is that the same names might mean different things, and in the
<br/>> > > software industry "Apache" is the foundation. In the "People's"
<br/>> > > business - it's the Tribe. Why don't we formally separate those two
<br/>> > > simply?
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > J.
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 1:31 AM me <me@emangini.com> wrote:
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > 100% with you about the mechanics of a poll.
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > It is absolutely necessary to have a clearly defined goal, hypothesis,
<br/>> > > etc. before we can drive a poll. I think coming up with those questions
<br/>> > is
<br/>> > > part of what we’re chatting about. That in itself can be a challenge. I
<br/>> > > agree about multiple options. (That’s where I was going w/ a Likert
<br/>> > scale).
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > In terms of LOE, there might be ways to mitigate some of the burden.
<br/>> > DEI
<br/>> > > efforts have never been as important to people as they are right now.
<br/>> > There
<br/>> > > are a lot of orgs willing to invest in that. Fundraising can easily turn
<br/>> > > into contracting fees. (I also work for a pretty large global consultancy
<br/>> > > whose core values are heavily focused on DEI, I’d be happy to socialize
<br/>> > the
<br/>> > > effort. PMs, Devs, UX, CX, and so on. )
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > From: Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
<br/>> > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 18:21:26
<br/>> > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > Schools and sports teams changing their names is trivial in comparison
<br/>> > > > to the scope of work here. How many schools or sports teams have their
<br/>> > > > name as part of APIs? This is on the level of deprecating .com in DNS
<br/>> > > > in favor of something else.
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > The concrete ideas like a new logo sound far more tractable, as would
<br/>> > > > things like no longer allowing new ASF projects to name themselves
<br/>> > > > after native culture.
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > As for a poll about willingness to change the name, I don't think
<br/>> > > > there will be useful results from such a poll without a more specific
<br/>> > > > set of questions. Perhaps aiming it towards a spectrum of options on
<br/>> > > > how to proceed with one end being no change and the other end being
<br/>> > > > full rename could be useful? For example, suppose there's much more
<br/>> > > > support in doing something like a logo change versus a name change; it
<br/>> > > > wouldn't be productive to poll about binary options as we wouldn't be
<br/>> > > > able to figure out which options may already be widely supported.
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 4:10 PM Walter Cameron
<br/>> > > > <walter.lists@waltercameron.com> wrote:
<br/>> > > > >
<br/>> > > > > I'm encouraged by the appetite for change expressed here, gunalchéesh
<br/>> > > to
<br/>> > > > > everyone for hearing me out and sharing your ideas and fleshing out
<br/>> > > more of
<br/>> > > > > a plan.
<br/>> > > > >
<br/>> > > > > I agree with everyone here that it’s a mountain of work to change the
<br/>> > > name,
<br/>> > > > > it took years to get us to this point and Myrle is right it will take
<br/>> > > > > decades to correct. I’ll do whatever I can and I’m sure others will
<br/>> > > also
<br/>> > > > > but decolonizing open source will take generations. It took the
<br/>> > > Washington
<br/>> > > > > Football Team a few seasons to pick a new name. I’m not saying a
<br/>> > > stopgap
<br/>> > > > > name is needed, but maybe just a commitment to changing the name from
<br/>> > > the
<br/>> > > > > membership could be a first point added to Myrle's outline. My gut
<br/>> > also
<br/>> > > > > says that despite the work, even the larger software community would
<br/>> > > > > welcome a new name.
<br/>> > > > >
<br/>> > > > > I think Ed is right that educating and driving the community to enact
<br/>> > > > > change will be a group effort. Maybe if a vote or poll of the
<br/>> > > membership
<br/>> > > > > indicated an openness to change that would encourage further effort
<br/>> > and
<br/>> > > > > volunteers to do the work. I know I’ve been in a lot of groups where
<br/>> > > people
<br/>> > > > > knowingly went down the wrong path just because they thought that’s
<br/>> > > what
<br/>> > > > > the group wanted, when really everyone was just following everyone
<br/>> > > else and
<br/>> > > > > maybe ASF’s branding is just such a situation.
<br/>> > > > >
<br/>> > > > > Walter
<br/>> > > > >
<br/>> > > > >
<br/>> > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:44 PM me <me@emangini.com> wrote:
<br/>> > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > I’m also willing to take on some of the tasks. I do want to point
<br/>> > > out that
<br/>> > > > > > if we over-decompose the problem, we’re just going to push the
<br/>> > > perception
<br/>> > > > > > of it being one problem that is too big to too many problems. Many
<br/>> > > of the
<br/>> > > > > > tasks and work are going to fail into categories, and there are
<br/>> > > going to be
<br/>> > > > > > many different ways to categorize the problems (hopefully to
<br/>> > > minimize the
<br/>> > > > > > impact of some of those dependencies).
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > I’m curious why there has to be one single person to “drive” the
<br/>> > > effort.
<br/>> > > > > > If we have a sufficient number of people (but not too many) that
<br/>> > are
<br/>> > > > > > willing to take on some of the tasks, why can’t those tasks be to
<br/>> > > drive it
<br/>> > > > > > by committee?
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > From: Myrle Krantz <myrle@apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 15:35:06
<br/>> > > > > > To: Community <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > Walter,
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > The assertion that we have paid staff, while correct, isn't
<br/>> > > particularly
<br/>> > > > > > relevant to the question. All of the top level leadership positions
<br/>> > > at
<br/>> > > > > > The
<br/>> > > > > > Foundation are unpaid volunteer roles, including
<br/>> > > > > > * President,
<br/>> > > > > > * Executive Vice President,
<br/>> > > > > > * VP Infra,
<br/>> > > > > > * VP Brand,
<br/>> > > > > > * VP Fundraising,
<br/>> > > > > > * Treasurer,
<br/>> > > > > > * VP Legal,
<br/>> > > > > > * VP Conferences,
<br/>> > > > > > * VP Privacy.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > Contractors have contracts with (more or less) well-defined scopes
<br/>> > > that
<br/>> > > > > > can't be expanded to include this kind of ad hoc work, without
<br/>> > > contract
<br/>> > > > > > negotiations, and added costs.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > All of these volunteers are doing this work in their free time
<br/>> > while
<br/>> > > also
<br/>> > > > > > doing the work the use to put food on their family's tables.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > That having been said, my gut tells me that the majority of The
<br/>> > > > > > Foundation
<br/>> > > > > > members agree that the name is sub-optimal. People just don't know
<br/>> > > how to
<br/>> > > > > > fix it. IMO: The first step would be to break the change you are
<br/>> > > asking
<br/>> > > > > > for down into steps small enough that people can imagine taking
<br/>> > them
<br/>> > > on,
<br/>> > > > > > or
<br/>> > > > > > that it is possible to contract out under the oversight of a
<br/>> > > volunteer.
<br/>> > > > > > Y'all check me, but I see:
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > * Picking a new name and achieving consensus that it's the right
<br/>> > > name.
<br/>> > > > > > * Legally changing the name of The Foundation itself.
<br/>> > > > > > * Understanding how this affects the many business relationships
<br/>> > the
<br/>> > > > > > Foundation has, and mitigating those effects.
<br/>> > > > > > * Designing new names and logos for the many brands The Foundation
<br/>> > > owns,
<br/>> > > > > > including project branding (eg "Apache Cassandra") the feather
<br/>> > logo,
<br/>> > > the
<br/>> > > > > > incubator logo, etc.
<br/>> > > > > > * Registering a new website domain.
<br/>> > > > > > * Namespaces/packages/artifact names/etc in The Foundation's many
<br/>> > > > > > projects.
<br/>> > > > > > * Getting OSI approval for a new license identical to "Apache
<br/>> > License
<br/>> > > > > > 2.0",
<br/>> > > > > > but under a new name. Getting that new license listed in various
<br/>> > > license
<br/>> > > > > > pickers.
<br/>> > > > > > * Marketing the new name so that it reaches a similar level of
<br/>> > > > > > recognition
<br/>> > > > > > as the old name.
<br/>> > > > > > * ...all the things I didn't think of.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > Some of this work will cross multiple jurisdictions. For example
<br/>> > > there
<br/>> > > > > > has
<br/>> > > > > > already been significant effort that I don't fully understand
<br/>> > > > > > establishing
<br/>> > > > > > Apache branding in China. Those efforts would have to be restarted.
<br/>> > > You'd
<br/>> > > > > > need to get support from our Chinese members.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > There are dependencies between some of these items. For example,
<br/>> > you
<br/>> > > > > > should get a new website domain before you can change artifact
<br/>> > names.
<br/>> > > > > > Possibly you would leave old artifacts with the old name, and only
<br/>> > > use
<br/>> > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > new name for new artifacts.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > Each of these tasks would touch a different set of areas of The
<br/>> > > > > > Foundation. For example, legally changing the Foundation's name
<br/>> > would
<br/>> > > > > > fall
<br/>> > > > > > under VP Legal. Infra would have to register new domain names, and
<br/>> > > set up
<br/>> > > > > > redirects, including to the ApacheCon domains. VP Conferences would
<br/>> > > have
<br/>> > > > > > to adjust the conference branding. VP Fundraising might need to
<br/>> > > notify
<br/>> > > > > > all
<br/>> > > > > > of our sponsors. etc. All in all this would be thousands of hours
<br/>> > of
<br/>> > > > > > work, that would need coordinating across multiple volunteers who
<br/>> > are
<br/>> > > > > > interested in doing a good job, but not necessarily able to respond
<br/>> > > to
<br/>> > > > > > tasks on deadlines. And at the end it would certainly be impossible
<br/>> > > to
<br/>> > > > > > fully complete it, because for example, changing package names
<br/>> > would
<br/>> > > > > > break
<br/>> > > > > > client code.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > Despite the complexity of the full change, some of these tasks are
<br/>> > > > > > independent of the others and can be taken on without an
<br/>> > expectation
<br/>> > > that
<br/>> > > > > > all tasks would be completed. For example, registering a new domain
<br/>> > > name,
<br/>> > > > > > and developing a consensus that it can be used instead of "apache"
<br/>> > > in new
<br/>> > > > > > projects might be possible without doing a full-on name change.
<br/>> > > > > > Introducing the same license under a new name might also be
<br/>> > > possible. And
<br/>> > > > > > replacing our logo with something more respectful might also be
<br/>> > > possible
<br/>> > > > > > without touching anything else. To tease out tasks like this would
<br/>> > > > > > require
<br/>> > > > > > someone with an interest in doing the hard work of decomposing the
<br/>> > > > > > problem,
<br/>> > > > > > discovering which pieces are independently solvable, developing
<br/>> > > consensus
<br/>> > > > > > that a change should be made, and then doing each change itself.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > Please recognize that to fully complete what I'm describing here
<br/>> > will
<br/>> > > > > > take
<br/>> > > > > > years, possibly more than a decade of work, and that it will
<br/>> > probably
<br/>> > > > > > never
<br/>> > > > > > be fully completed, and that it will require buy-in from hundreds,
<br/>> > > > > > possibly
<br/>> > > > > > thousands of people. To achieve full buy-in, you'd need to convince
<br/>> > > > > > people
<br/>> > > > > > not only that the work is worth doing, but also that you are in it
<br/>> > > for as
<br/>> > > > > > long as the task will take. With all that as context: if someone is
<br/>> > > > > > willing to do that work of driving that effort, then I'm willing to
<br/>> > > take
<br/>> > > > > > on
<br/>> > > > > > some individual tasks in the process that fall within my area of
<br/>> > > > > > expertise. But I personally am not willing to *drive* that effort,
<br/>> > > and I
<br/>> > > > > > haven't seen that anyone else is willing to either.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > Walter, when someone replies "You want this change, but are you
<br/>> > > willing
<br/>> > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > do the work?" this may be what they are asking. Despite all of
<br/>> > that,
<br/>> > > your
<br/>> > > > > > statements about the disrespect of the name and the logos, and some
<br/>> > > of
<br/>> > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > project names are valid. The hurt you describe is real. And I wish
<br/>> > it
<br/>> > > > > > weren't so.
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > Best Regards,
<br/>> > > > > > Myrle Krantz
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 8:24 PM Julian Hyde <jhyde@apache.org>
<br/>> > > wrote:
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > I think it would be useful to poll ASF members' opinions. This
<br/>> > > would
<br/>> > > > > > > not be a vote (in the sense that any action would result if the
<br/>> > > vote
<br/>> > > > > > > 'passes') even though we may choose to implement the poll using
<br/>> > > STevE
<br/>> > > > > > > during a members meeting. It would allow us to gauge where
<br/>> > opinions
<br/>> > > > > > > are, and track changes in members' opinions over time.
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > As others have noted, a discussion followed by a vote would
<br/>> > likely
<br/>> > > be
<br/>> > > > > > > divisive, because the discussion would be dominated by those with
<br/>> > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > most polarized opinions.
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > Julian
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:36 AM me <me@emangini.com> wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > Thanks Sam and Andrew for helping provide visibility!
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
<br/>> > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 13:35:41
<br/>> > > > > > > > To: Apache Community Dev <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > Moving board to bcc. Mixing public and private mailing lists is
<br/>> > > not a
<br/>> > > > > > > > good idea.
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:48 PM Andrew Musselman <
<br/>> > > akm@apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > Copying them now.
<br/>> > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 9:46 AM me <me@emangini.com> wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > @Andrew,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > How do we engage the board?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > Ed Mangini
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > me@emangini.com
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Musselman <akm@apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 12:44:28
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 8:28 AM me <me@emangini.com>
<br/>> > wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Andrew,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > I agree that putting it to a member vote is possibly
<br/>> > > polarizing
<br/>> > > > > > > (and
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > premature). That’s not really the intent here. A poll is
<br/>> > a
<br/>> > > > > > dipstick
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > effort
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > to check the temperature before we reach strategy and
<br/>> > > tactics.
<br/>> > > > > > > Polling
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > is
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > more about discovery.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > I think you'll get a similar reaction from a poll.
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > I personally think a poll is premature. At the moment, you
<br/>> > don't
<br/>> > > have
<br/>> > > > > > > > a proposed name, scope, or size of effort. Without a
<br/>> > definition,
<br/>> > > it
<br/>> > > > > > > > isn't clear what people will be expressing support for (or
<br/>> > > against).
<br/>> > > > > > > > It is OK to leave some parts TBD for a poll, but for a poll to
<br/>> > be
<br/>> > > > > > > > useful there needs to be some substance.
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > I’m all for the outreach. For my own clarification, are
<br/>> > you
<br/>> > > > > > > looking at
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > this as a means of defining boundaries on the effort,
<br/>> > > setting
<br/>> > > > > > > urgency
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > on
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > the efforts (or some combination of both?)
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > I think this is such an expansive and encompassing topic
<br/>> > that
<br/>> > > > > > covers
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > almost
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > every aspect of the operations of the foundation that it
<br/>> > > might be
<br/>> > > > > > > smart
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > for
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > the board to have a look and build up a plan before doing
<br/>> > > any ad
<br/>> > > > > > hoc
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > outreach.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > Is this something you’re willing to do or kick off?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > I personally don't have bandwidth to participate in
<br/>> > > activities on
<br/>> > > > > > > this,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > no.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Is there any reason why we can’t move forward with both a
<br/>> > > poll
<br/>> > > > > > and
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > outreach?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > Again I think this is a board decision but I am not a
<br/>> > lawyer.
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > Board decision will come much later. Meanwhile, many board
<br/>> > > members
<br/>> > > > > > > > watch this list.
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > - Sam Ruby
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Musselman <akm@apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
<br/>> > dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 10:14:05
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as someone in the Pacific Northwest US, where we
<br/>> > > say
<br/>> > > > > > land
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > acknowledgement for the Duwamish tribe at the beginning
<br/>> > of
<br/>> > > all
<br/>> > > > > > > school
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > events, meaning I respect and understand the motivation
<br/>> > for
<br/>> > > > > > this:
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > I think simply opening this up for a member vote will
<br/>> > > result in
<br/>> > > > > > an
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > unproductive firefight. Reactions will range from
<br/>> > > enthusiastic
<br/>> > > > > > > sympathy
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > bewildered annoyance to outright hostile accusations.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Can I propose an outreach to some Apache tribe
<br/>> > governments
<br/>> > > so
<br/>> > > > > > we
<br/>> > > > > > > can
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > open
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > a
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > dialog with them directly, and start to understand what
<br/>> > > their
<br/>> > > > > > > official
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > experience of the ASF branding is?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Then we could formulate a plan after some deliberation.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > The plan could include logo redesign if the feather
<br/>> > symbol
<br/>> > > is
<br/>> > > > > > > viewed as
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > insensitive, for example, and other changes balanced with
<br/>> > > > > > > feasibility
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > and
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > community values.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Best
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Andrew
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 6:29 AM me <me@emangini.com>
<br/>> > > wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > @Christian
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > You’re very welcome! I think an internal poll has a
<br/>> > > great way
<br/>> > > > > > of
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > defining
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > footholds. It’s going to be hard to craft to avoid
<br/>> > > > > > confirmation
<br/>> > > > > > > bias,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > but I
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > think it’s definitely possible.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > @Matt
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > I agree. There is no doubt that this is something that
<br/>> > > would
<br/>> > > > > > > require
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > stages. Approaching this “Big Bang” style is going to
<br/>> > > fail
<br/>> > > > > > pretty
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > quickly.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > I’m thinking the effort is going to be an amalgam of
<br/>> > the
<br/>> > > > > > > Washington
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > Redskins -> Commanders effort + the migration from
<br/>> > JUnit
<br/>> > > 4 to
<br/>> > > > > > 5.
<br/>> > > > > > > This
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > definitely hits on the “strategic” aspect of Sam’s
<br/>> > > initial
<br/>> > > > > > > questions.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can probably differentiate a brand change
<br/>> > and
<br/>> > > a
<br/>> > > > > > name
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > change
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > as
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > separate efforts (or at the very least separate life
<br/>> > > cycles).
<br/>> > > > > > > Large
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > organizations that acquire startups and small companies
<br/>> > > often
<br/>> > > > > > > rebrand
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > acquired assets and their products to better fit their
<br/>> > > > > > > business/tech
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > strategy. However, underlying assets (repos, docs,
<br/>> > > materials)
<br/>> > > > > > are
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > retrofit
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > at a slower burn.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > I think the first action item is probably a poll. I’m
<br/>> > > happy
<br/>> > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > pair/mob
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > (virtually or otherwise) on it with someone. Are there
<br/>> > > any
<br/>> > > > > > > particular
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > psychometrics we’d like to leverage (i.e. Likert?)
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > @Walter, do you want to take a first stab at a poll?
<br/>> > > Maybe we
<br/>> > > > > > > can put
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > together a small tiger team to carry it out?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > From: Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
<br/>> > > dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 28, 2022 at 18:45:07
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > Defining a scope here is also fairly important. For
<br/>> > > example,
<br/>> > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > apache.org domain name is fairly baked into a lot of
<br/>> > > > > > > unchangeable
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > places such as Java package names, every single
<br/>> > released
<br/>> > > > > > > artifact,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > software license itself (which is used by tons of
<br/>> > people
<br/>> > > > > > outside
<br/>> > > > > > > of
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > ASF), all the existing public URLs to things, email
<br/>> > > > > > addresses,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > signing
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > keys, the GitHub organization name, tons of
<br/>> > > infrastructure
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > configuration, finance documents, corporate documents,
<br/>> > > > > > > trademarks,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > and
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > surely other areas I'm forgetting.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > If we have a name change and only update the places
<br/>> > where
<br/>> > > > > > it's
<br/>> > > > > > > easy
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > do so, the name Apache will still be highly visible in
<br/>> > > tons
<br/>> > > > > > of
<br/>> > > > > > > key
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > areas for the indefinite future. This isn't even
<br/>> > > considering
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > downstream users of Apache software, either, who may or
<br/>> > > may
<br/>> > > > > > not
<br/>> > > > > > > adopt
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > a rename. These are some of the fairly intractable
<br/>> > > concerns
<br/>> > > > > > I've
<br/>> > > > > > > had
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > about a name change, and that's even after working with
<br/>> > > > > > another
<br/>> > > > > > > OSS
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > project that went through a name change and still has
<br/>> > > tons of
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > references to its old names due to compatibility
<br/>> > issues.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 3:49 PM Christian Grobmeier
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > <grobmeier@apache.org> wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, at 22:19, me wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Christian,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Were you thinking of an internal poll? That’s
<br/>> > > actually a
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > spectacular
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > idea.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that was I was thinking. Basically a poll on
<br/>> > > members@,
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > since
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > (I
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > guess) members would eventually decide on that
<br/>> > proposal.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do we go about kicking that off?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not so sure either, but I guess writing the poll
<br/>> > > and
<br/>> > > > > > > proposing
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > it
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > to community@ would be a first step. Once decided on
<br/>> > the
<br/>> > > > > > > content we
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > could
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > vote on sending it, and then send it to members@
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > Others may have different ideas, but that is my first
<br/>> > > idea
<br/>> > > > > > on
<br/>> > > > > > > it.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for calling my idea spectacular, it gives me a
<br/>> > > warm
<br/>> > > > > > > feeling,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > since I didn't think of it as such :)
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > Christian
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed Mangini
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > me@emangini.com
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Christian Grobmeier <grobmeier@apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
<br/>> > > dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 28, 2022 at 15:43:04
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <
<br/>> > > dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hello,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, at 20:57, me wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > The desire to make the change is definitely
<br/>> > > there. I
<br/>> > > > > > echo
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > Walter’s
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > passion and statements.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I also agree w/ Sam that this isn’t going to be
<br/>> > > easy
<br/>> > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > accomplish.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Perhaps a starting point would be to answer
<br/>> > these
<br/>> > > > > > > questions in
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > concert:
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - what is the LOE to perform the
<br/>> > > rebranding/renaming?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - are there enough volunteers within the
<br/>> > > organization
<br/>> > > > > > > willing
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > participate?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - what does the community think?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I want to emphasize that this last question is a
<br/>> > > point
<br/>> > > > > > of
<br/>> > > > > > > no
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > return. If
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > we start creating surveys and asking about our
<br/>> > > brand,
<br/>> > > > > > it’s
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > going
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > chum the waters.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Agreed. I would have thought to make a poll in the
<br/>> > > > > > community
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > first-
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > briefly explain the issue and see what the community
<br/>> > > > > > > (non-binding)
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > vote
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > is
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > - just checking sentiments.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I am afraid there will be a lot of headwinds. But
<br/>> > > based
<br/>> > > > > > on
<br/>> > > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > outcome one could decide if its more work to explain
<br/>> > the
<br/>> > > issue
<br/>> > > > > > or
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > actually
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > solve the issue.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Also a quick poll could stir up some people who
<br/>> > are
<br/>> > > > > > > interested
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > in
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > helping.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Cheers,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Christian
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > From: Walter Cameron <
<br/>> > > walter.lists@waltercameron.com>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
<br/>> > > > > > dev@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Date: April 28, 2022 at 01:29:03
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > To: dev@community.apache.org <
<br/>> > > dev@community.apache.org>
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 6:40 PM Sam Ruby <
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > rubys@intertwingly.net>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> Walter: what are you personally willing to
<br/>> > > volunteer
<br/>> > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > do?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > What
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > is
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> your plan? What resources do you need?
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Honestly Sam the extent of my plan was to bring
<br/>> > > > > > attention
<br/>> > > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > this
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > issue and
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > the harms it’s caused. Beyond that I’m kinda
<br/>> > > winging
<br/>> > > > > > it
<br/>> > > > > > > but I
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > appreciate
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > your eagerness and openness to change. I had
<br/>> > > hoped I’d
<br/>> > > > > > > speak
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > up,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > people
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > would finally pull their heads out of the sand
<br/>> > > and work
<br/>> > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > undo
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > harm
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > they’ve caused.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > ASF’s brand violates its own CoC. You would
<br/>> > think
<br/>> > > that
<br/>> > > > > > > might
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > spur
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > effort
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > for change by those perpetuating the harm, but
<br/>> > if
<br/>> > > you
<br/>> > > > > > > want me
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > do
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > work I’ll do whatever I can. I’m not that
<br/>> > familiar
<br/>> > > > > > with
<br/>> > > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > details
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > of the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > organization, surely not as familiar as one of
<br/>> > its
<br/>> > > > > > > Directors,
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > so
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > in
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > a lot
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > of ways I don’t fully understand the scope of
<br/>> > what
<br/>> > > > > > needs
<br/>> > > > > > > to be
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > done, but
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I’m willing to volunteer a few weekends of my
<br/>> > > > > > rudimentary
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > technical
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > and
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > design skills to run a “Find & Replace…” and put
<br/>> > > > > > together
<br/>> > > > > > > a
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > new
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > logo or
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > whatever you think would be helpful in this
<br/>> > > effort. I
<br/>> > > > > > > haven’t
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > designed a
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > logo in probably 15 years but I’m willing to
<br/>> > give
<br/>> > > it a
<br/>> > > > > > > try.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I would have assumed that an organization with a
<br/>> > > paid
<br/>> > > > > > > staff
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > and
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > goals to
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > increase the diversity of its contributors and
<br/>> > > > > > continue
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > receiving
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > corporate
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > donations would understand that the costs of
<br/>> > > inaction
<br/>> > > > > > > outweigh
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > the
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > costs of
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > action here.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Let me know what else I can do to help.
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Walter
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<br/>> > > > > > > dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
<br/>> > > > > > > dev-help@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<br/>> > > dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
<br/>> > > dev-help@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<br/>> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<br/>> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > > >
<br/>> > > > > >
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<br/>> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > >
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
<br/>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
<br/>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
<br/>> > >
<br/>> > >
<br/>> >
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>---------------------------------------------------------------------
<br/>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
<br/>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
<br/>
<br/></div>
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com>.
Yeah. Very much agree with Owen.
I think this is a very different situation than offensive use and
slogans. Also even if the association was in the minds of those who
started the ASF, it's missing even among the vast majority of the ASF
members. We cannot compare the sports teams which are actively
promoting their names and branding both internally and externally and
build "business" on using the names with the ASF that does not
actually do that at all. First - because there is no business to make,
and more importantly because the ASF simply does not use the Apache
name for any promotion - neither internalisation nor externalisation
of the name.
I would say (of course I might not see perspective of all the people)
that the ripple effect on contributors does not exist, because ...
despite the official explanation of the origin and the feather - we,
the committers, contributors, PMC members and ASF members do not
consider ourselves as "Apache" people. We are members of the ASF which
does contain Apache in the name but we do not really claim or drive
any of our behaviours from the Tribe - and none of the ASF community
efforts have any notion of that. The ONLY loose relation is the
Feather. And while it might be somewhat difficult for ASF old-timers
to part with it - but for those who came later it's nothing but an
icon/logo that could be potentially replaced with another logo without
much of an impact. Just the fact that when we think (or at last it
looks like to me) that changing the Feather to something else is easy
and impact-less, means that we do not even think of ourselves as
"Apache's" in any way meaningful to the Tribe. And I think, this is
important that we do not have to even change this "thinking" as part
of any rebranding - because it is simply not there.
This is in stark contrast with many other companies and organisations
which made a lot of internalisation and externalisation of their
branding and names. As an example - I have been for a while working at
Snowflake and there are lots and lots and lots of internalisation and
externalisation of "snow and snowflake" down to the internal use of
"fresh snow" when people are hired or "it's snowing in Warsaw" public
slogan when our company was acquired. The ASF does nothing of that
whatsoever.
So really IMHO the Apache in the name of the ASF is just that - name
without the association.
I seriously doubt a group of reasonable thinking individuals might
put-off by the fact that we "pretend" to be Apaches when we actually
don't. And - of course - we cannot please everyone, and there are some
people who might call it out in the name of political correctness.
This happens a lot of times nowadays. Both inside and outside people
might do it. It's inevitable and well - normal and there is nothing
wrong with that, to be honest. People have concerns, people express
them, and everyone is different, we have different backgrounds,
biases, opinions and associations in our heads. And we - as a group of
reasonable thinking members, should hear and listen to those voices.
But also we should use our best judgment to see if those are real
problems or something that is really at most a slight annoyance for a
very small group of people and whether - by using the name we show any
disrespect or harm or even cut off ourselves from some opportunities
and people. There are (IMHO) no practical nor even emotional reasons
applicable to a wider or even quite small group of people in this case
that would justify the name change. Of course - we are not able to
satisfy everyone and respond to all individuals feeling differently,
but we can just do our best to show our respect and make a deliberate,
thoughtful discussion (like we do now :)) and carefully consider our
position, weight pros and cons and make a conscious decision as
members - what we do with those voices.
I personally think (and when/if it comes to any voting that would be
my vote) that we do not show any disrespect or make any harm or even
put some people of if we stay with the Apache name as long as we
remove the association - which is a great opportunity as well to build
some engagement and common cause,
Also when it comes to that I would love to be engaged and help in
making it happen in whatever way I might find myself useful - whatever
the directions the members choose.
This is a good cause to spend time on. Showing respect and responding
(in reasonable scope) to concerns of people who feel bothered by the
current situation is cool. And a noble thing to do. We've been doing
it when we removed insensitive names from our code - eagerly - and
doing that for the ASF cause is really cool.
J.
On Sun, May 1, 2022 at 7:39 AM Owen Rubel <or...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well you may not need to.
>
> School and sports teams change their names because they are offensive and
> the tribe registers a complaint.
>
> In the sense of the Apache foundation, I sincerely donut the tribe will
> ever register an official complaint because it is a nonprofit that does
> community outreach and gives away software.
>
> They do not put the tribes image in a poor light nor do they use slogans,
> imagery that put the tribe in a poor light
>
> These are all things that would cause the Apache Nation to respond.
>
> The Apache Foundation has seemingly been a good steward so unless someone
> from the Apache Nation provides an official complaint, I would not worry.
>
> However... rebranding may be a good suggestion.
>
> Still some community outreach may be good so you can know if you even
> SHOULD start the path of rebranding; it may not even be necessary and you
> can put it to rest once and for all if they see you as good stewards.,
>
> Owen Rubel
> orubel@gmail.com
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 5:49 AM Ed Mangini <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
>
> > Creative!
> >
> > How do we change the original intent?
> >
> > Our website directly references the Apache tribe, and that data point is
> > referenced in various web assets of which we have no control.
> >
> > This is where Andrew's notion of outreach would be absolutely requisite to
> > determine if disassociation is enough. It might even require sponsorship.
> >
> > We'd need careful wordsmithing.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 05:03 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I think we all vastly underestimate the ripple effect such a change might
> > > have.
> > > I do understand some of the sentiments of people who want change.
> > >
> > > However, maybe there is an easier way to handle this issue.
> > >
> > > Do we really have to change the name or just disassociate with the
> > > Apache Tribe ? I think the latter does not need name change and will
> > > be few orders of magnitude easier and possible to do in a few months
> > > rather than decades.
> > >
> > > For the vast majority of people in the software industry I think, the
> > > "Apache Software Foundation" bears absolutely no relation to the
> > > Apache Tribe. Why would it? Yeah originally it was a homage to some of
> > > the qualities of the Apache Tribe as the origin of the name is, and we
> > > do have the Feather which somewhat relates to the tribe. But for all
> > > practical purposes and mental association there is no relation between
> > > the two.
> > >
> > > I've been working in a trademark office for some time and from how I
> > > understand how names and brands are considered and used - "brands" and
> > > "names" can only be reserved in the "scope" they are registered for.
> > > So all Apache brand and naming is valid in "software" (and there the
> > > foundation obviously is associated with the name) - but there is
> > > nothing wrong (at least in the brand/trademark world) to have another
> > > "Apache" registered for another business (think Helicopters). Of
> > > course tribe is not a business, but I think the laws of trademark are
> > > simply reflecting the way people think about names and brands.
> > >
> > > While originally people who created The ASF have thought about some
> > > qualities associated with the Apache Tribe, true, but I think this was
> > > a very "loose" connection. Over the years Apache and The ASF actually
> > > "created from scratch" the meaning of the "Apache" word in the
> > > software industry. In this industry there is no "Apache Tribe" and
> > > never was, there is no other "Apache". What's even more - those
> > > qualities and properties chosen back there are not even the ones that
> > > bind the Apache Software Foundation together ("community over code").
> > > I think there was no real bad effect in the past that ASF would
> > > somewhat create for the tribe, but - more importantly - there was no
> > > piggy-backing I think. Since the name Apache was not really known in
> > > the industry, and the association with the Tribe was mostly in the
> > > minds of the people who created it and not in the minds of the users,
> > > you cannot really say that the ASF "abused" the name to build its
> > > position or otherwise build its reputation based on the Tribe itself.
> > > In a way it was just a name, one of many, that people creating the ASF
> > > could choose, and it was more for them than for the external world.
> > > Then they worked 20 years to build the quality and reputation of the
> > > "Apache" name in the software industry - without any piggybacking or
> > > abusing of the association, I think. So in a way expecting to throw
> > > back these 20 years of brand-building in a completely new industry is
> > > not really too "symmetrical" I believe.
> > >
> > > Since the connection is so "loose", I would say we have the option to
> > > simply formally disassociate the meaning from the Tribe but leave the
> > > name Apache with the foundation.
> > >
> > > Why don't we simply:
> > >
> > > * change the explanation of the name (And figure out some nice acronym
> > > that APACHE might stand for - we can even vote on some proposals
> > > there).
> > > * remove the Feather from the logo and replace it with something more
> > > abstract (yet another opportunity to get some members energized around
> > > proposing and voting for a new logo)
> > > * ask the few projects that might get an explicit association with the
> > > Tribe (Arrow? Geronimo?) to change their names - that will be
> > > immensely easier than changing the Foundation name
> > > * to formally disassociate the meaning while also adding a homage for
> > > the past association to the Tribe while we are separating the meaning
> > >
> > > Of course - maybe I just do not understand the feelings, and desired
> > > of those who feel strongly about the association, but I think the fact
> > > of life is that the same names might mean different things, and in the
> > > software industry "Apache" is the foundation. In the "People's"
> > > business - it's the Tribe. Why don't we formally separate those two
> > > simply?
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 1:31 AM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 100% with you about the mechanics of a poll.
> > > >
> > > > It is absolutely necessary to have a clearly defined goal, hypothesis,
> > > etc. before we can drive a poll. I think coming up with those questions
> > is
> > > part of what we’re chatting about. That in itself can be a challenge. I
> > > agree about multiple options. (That’s where I was going w/ a Likert
> > scale).
> > > >
> > > > In terms of LOE, there might be ways to mitigate some of the burden.
> > DEI
> > > efforts have never been as important to people as they are right now.
> > There
> > > are a lot of orgs willing to invest in that. Fundraising can easily turn
> > > into contracting fees. (I also work for a pretty large global consultancy
> > > whose core values are heavily focused on DEI, I’d be happy to socialize
> > the
> > > effort. PMs, Devs, UX, CX, and so on. )
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 18:21:26
> > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > >
> > > > Schools and sports teams changing their names is trivial in comparison
> > > > to the scope of work here. How many schools or sports teams have their
> > > > name as part of APIs? This is on the level of deprecating .com in DNS
> > > > in favor of something else.
> > > >
> > > > The concrete ideas like a new logo sound far more tractable, as would
> > > > things like no longer allowing new ASF projects to name themselves
> > > > after native culture.
> > > >
> > > > As for a poll about willingness to change the name, I don't think
> > > > there will be useful results from such a poll without a more specific
> > > > set of questions. Perhaps aiming it towards a spectrum of options on
> > > > how to proceed with one end being no change and the other end being
> > > > full rename could be useful? For example, suppose there's much more
> > > > support in doing something like a logo change versus a name change; it
> > > > wouldn't be productive to poll about binary options as we wouldn't be
> > > > able to figure out which options may already be widely supported.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 4:10 PM Walter Cameron
> > > > <wa...@waltercameron.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm encouraged by the appetite for change expressed here, gunalchéesh
> > > to
> > > > > everyone for hearing me out and sharing your ideas and fleshing out
> > > more of
> > > > > a plan.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with everyone here that it’s a mountain of work to change the
> > > name,
> > > > > it took years to get us to this point and Myrle is right it will take
> > > > > decades to correct. I’ll do whatever I can and I’m sure others will
> > > also
> > > > > but decolonizing open source will take generations. It took the
> > > Washington
> > > > > Football Team a few seasons to pick a new name. I’m not saying a
> > > stopgap
> > > > > name is needed, but maybe just a commitment to changing the name from
> > > the
> > > > > membership could be a first point added to Myrle's outline. My gut
> > also
> > > > > says that despite the work, even the larger software community would
> > > > > welcome a new name.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think Ed is right that educating and driving the community to enact
> > > > > change will be a group effort. Maybe if a vote or poll of the
> > > membership
> > > > > indicated an openness to change that would encourage further effort
> > and
> > > > > volunteers to do the work. I know I’ve been in a lot of groups where
> > > people
> > > > > knowingly went down the wrong path just because they thought that’s
> > > what
> > > > > the group wanted, when really everyone was just following everyone
> > > else and
> > > > > maybe ASF’s branding is just such a situation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Walter
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:44 PM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I’m also willing to take on some of the tasks. I do want to point
> > > out that
> > > > > > if we over-decompose the problem, we’re just going to push the
> > > perception
> > > > > > of it being one problem that is too big to too many problems. Many
> > > of the
> > > > > > tasks and work are going to fail into categories, and there are
> > > going to be
> > > > > > many different ways to categorize the problems (hopefully to
> > > minimize the
> > > > > > impact of some of those dependencies).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I’m curious why there has to be one single person to “drive” the
> > > effort.
> > > > > > If we have a sufficient number of people (but not too many) that
> > are
> > > > > > willing to take on some of the tasks, why can’t those tasks be to
> > > drive it
> > > > > > by committee?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org>
> > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 15:35:06
> > > > > > To: Community <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Walter,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The assertion that we have paid staff, while correct, isn't
> > > particularly
> > > > > > relevant to the question. All of the top level leadership positions
> > > at
> > > > > > The
> > > > > > Foundation are unpaid volunteer roles, including
> > > > > > * President,
> > > > > > * Executive Vice President,
> > > > > > * VP Infra,
> > > > > > * VP Brand,
> > > > > > * VP Fundraising,
> > > > > > * Treasurer,
> > > > > > * VP Legal,
> > > > > > * VP Conferences,
> > > > > > * VP Privacy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Contractors have contracts with (more or less) well-defined scopes
> > > that
> > > > > > can't be expanded to include this kind of ad hoc work, without
> > > contract
> > > > > > negotiations, and added costs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All of these volunteers are doing this work in their free time
> > while
> > > also
> > > > > > doing the work the use to put food on their family's tables.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That having been said, my gut tells me that the majority of The
> > > > > > Foundation
> > > > > > members agree that the name is sub-optimal. People just don't know
> > > how to
> > > > > > fix it. IMO: The first step would be to break the change you are
> > > asking
> > > > > > for down into steps small enough that people can imagine taking
> > them
> > > on,
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > that it is possible to contract out under the oversight of a
> > > volunteer.
> > > > > > Y'all check me, but I see:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * Picking a new name and achieving consensus that it's the right
> > > name.
> > > > > > * Legally changing the name of The Foundation itself.
> > > > > > * Understanding how this affects the many business relationships
> > the
> > > > > > Foundation has, and mitigating those effects.
> > > > > > * Designing new names and logos for the many brands The Foundation
> > > owns,
> > > > > > including project branding (eg "Apache Cassandra") the feather
> > logo,
> > > the
> > > > > > incubator logo, etc.
> > > > > > * Registering a new website domain.
> > > > > > * Namespaces/packages/artifact names/etc in The Foundation's many
> > > > > > projects.
> > > > > > * Getting OSI approval for a new license identical to "Apache
> > License
> > > > > > 2.0",
> > > > > > but under a new name. Getting that new license listed in various
> > > license
> > > > > > pickers.
> > > > > > * Marketing the new name so that it reaches a similar level of
> > > > > > recognition
> > > > > > as the old name.
> > > > > > * ...all the things I didn't think of.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some of this work will cross multiple jurisdictions. For example
> > > there
> > > > > > has
> > > > > > already been significant effort that I don't fully understand
> > > > > > establishing
> > > > > > Apache branding in China. Those efforts would have to be restarted.
> > > You'd
> > > > > > need to get support from our Chinese members.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are dependencies between some of these items. For example,
> > you
> > > > > > should get a new website domain before you can change artifact
> > names.
> > > > > > Possibly you would leave old artifacts with the old name, and only
> > > use
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > new name for new artifacts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Each of these tasks would touch a different set of areas of The
> > > > > > Foundation. For example, legally changing the Foundation's name
> > would
> > > > > > fall
> > > > > > under VP Legal. Infra would have to register new domain names, and
> > > set up
> > > > > > redirects, including to the ApacheCon domains. VP Conferences would
> > > have
> > > > > > to adjust the conference branding. VP Fundraising might need to
> > > notify
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > of our sponsors. etc. All in all this would be thousands of hours
> > of
> > > > > > work, that would need coordinating across multiple volunteers who
> > are
> > > > > > interested in doing a good job, but not necessarily able to respond
> > > to
> > > > > > tasks on deadlines. And at the end it would certainly be impossible
> > > to
> > > > > > fully complete it, because for example, changing package names
> > would
> > > > > > break
> > > > > > client code.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Despite the complexity of the full change, some of these tasks are
> > > > > > independent of the others and can be taken on without an
> > expectation
> > > that
> > > > > > all tasks would be completed. For example, registering a new domain
> > > name,
> > > > > > and developing a consensus that it can be used instead of "apache"
> > > in new
> > > > > > projects might be possible without doing a full-on name change.
> > > > > > Introducing the same license under a new name might also be
> > > possible. And
> > > > > > replacing our logo with something more respectful might also be
> > > possible
> > > > > > without touching anything else. To tease out tasks like this would
> > > > > > require
> > > > > > someone with an interest in doing the hard work of decomposing the
> > > > > > problem,
> > > > > > discovering which pieces are independently solvable, developing
> > > consensus
> > > > > > that a change should be made, and then doing each change itself.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please recognize that to fully complete what I'm describing here
> > will
> > > > > > take
> > > > > > years, possibly more than a decade of work, and that it will
> > probably
> > > > > > never
> > > > > > be fully completed, and that it will require buy-in from hundreds,
> > > > > > possibly
> > > > > > thousands of people. To achieve full buy-in, you'd need to convince
> > > > > > people
> > > > > > not only that the work is worth doing, but also that you are in it
> > > for as
> > > > > > long as the task will take. With all that as context: if someone is
> > > > > > willing to do that work of driving that effort, then I'm willing to
> > > take
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > some individual tasks in the process that fall within my area of
> > > > > > expertise. But I personally am not willing to *drive* that effort,
> > > and I
> > > > > > haven't seen that anyone else is willing to either.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Walter, when someone replies "You want this change, but are you
> > > willing
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > do the work?" this may be what they are asking. Despite all of
> > that,
> > > your
> > > > > > statements about the disrespect of the name and the logos, and some
> > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > project names are valid. The hurt you describe is real. And I wish
> > it
> > > > > > weren't so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > Myrle Krantz
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 8:24 PM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it would be useful to poll ASF members' opinions. This
> > > would
> > > > > > > not be a vote (in the sense that any action would result if the
> > > vote
> > > > > > > 'passes') even though we may choose to implement the poll using
> > > STevE
> > > > > > > during a members meeting. It would allow us to gauge where
> > opinions
> > > > > > > are, and track changes in members' opinions over time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As others have noted, a discussion followed by a vote would
> > likely
> > > be
> > > > > > > divisive, because the discussion would be dominated by those with
> > > the
> > > > > > > most polarized opinions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Julian
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:36 AM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks Sam and Andrew for helping provide visibility!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > From: Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
> > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 13:35:41
> > > > > > > > To: Apache Community Dev <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Moving board to bcc. Mixing public and private mailing lists is
> > > not a
> > > > > > > > good idea.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:48 PM Andrew Musselman <
> > > akm@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Copying them now.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 9:46 AM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > @Andrew,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > How do we engage the board?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ed Mangini
> > > > > > > > > > me@emangini.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Musselman <ak...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 12:44:28
> > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 8:28 AM me <me...@emangini.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Andrew,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I agree that putting it to a member vote is possibly
> > > polarizing
> > > > > > > (and
> > > > > > > > > > > premature). That’s not really the intent here. A poll is
> > a
> > > > > > dipstick
> > > > > > > > > > effort
> > > > > > > > > > > to check the temperature before we reach strategy and
> > > tactics.
> > > > > > > Polling
> > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > more about discovery.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think you'll get a similar reaction from a poll.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I personally think a poll is premature. At the moment, you
> > don't
> > > have
> > > > > > > > a proposed name, scope, or size of effort. Without a
> > definition,
> > > it
> > > > > > > > isn't clear what people will be expressing support for (or
> > > against).
> > > > > > > > It is OK to leave some parts TBD for a poll, but for a poll to
> > be
> > > > > > > > useful there needs to be some substance.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I’m all for the outreach. For my own clarification, are
> > you
> > > > > > > looking at
> > > > > > > > > > > this as a means of defining boundaries on the effort,
> > > setting
> > > > > > > urgency
> > > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > the efforts (or some combination of both?)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think this is such an expansive and encompassing topic
> > that
> > > > > > covers
> > > > > > > > > > almost
> > > > > > > > > > every aspect of the operations of the foundation that it
> > > might be
> > > > > > > smart
> > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > the board to have a look and build up a plan before doing
> > > any ad
> > > > > > hoc
> > > > > > > > > > outreach.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Is this something you’re willing to do or kick off?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I personally don't have bandwidth to participate in
> > > activities on
> > > > > > > this,
> > > > > > > > > > no.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Is there any reason why we can’t move forward with both a
> > > poll
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > outreach?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Again I think this is a board decision but I am not a
> > lawyer.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Board decision will come much later. Meanwhile, many board
> > > members
> > > > > > > > watch this list.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - Sam Ruby
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Musselman <ak...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 10:14:05
> > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as someone in the Pacific Northwest US, where we
> > > say
> > > > > > land
> > > > > > > > > > > acknowledgement for the Duwamish tribe at the beginning
> > of
> > > all
> > > > > > > school
> > > > > > > > > > > events, meaning I respect and understand the motivation
> > for
> > > > > > this:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I think simply opening this up for a member vote will
> > > result in
> > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > unproductive firefight. Reactions will range from
> > > enthusiastic
> > > > > > > sympathy
> > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > bewildered annoyance to outright hostile accusations.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Can I propose an outreach to some Apache tribe
> > governments
> > > so
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > open
> > > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > dialog with them directly, and start to understand what
> > > their
> > > > > > > official
> > > > > > > > > > > experience of the ASF branding is?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Then we could formulate a plan after some deliberation.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The plan could include logo redesign if the feather
> > symbol
> > > is
> > > > > > > viewed as
> > > > > > > > > > > insensitive, for example, and other changes balanced with
> > > > > > > feasibility
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > community values.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Best
> > > > > > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 6:29 AM me <me...@emangini.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > @Christian
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > You’re very welcome! I think an internal poll has a
> > > great way
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > defining
> > > > > > > > > > > > footholds. It’s going to be hard to craft to avoid
> > > > > > confirmation
> > > > > > > bias,
> > > > > > > > > > > but I
> > > > > > > > > > > > think it’s definitely possible.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > @Matt
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I agree. There is no doubt that this is something that
> > > would
> > > > > > > require
> > > > > > > > > > > > stages. Approaching this “Big Bang” style is going to
> > > fail
> > > > > > pretty
> > > > > > > > > > > quickly.
> > > > > > > > > > > > I’m thinking the effort is going to be an amalgam of
> > the
> > > > > > > Washington
> > > > > > > > > > > > Redskins -> Commanders effort + the migration from
> > JUnit
> > > 4 to
> > > > > > 5.
> > > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > > > definitely hits on the “strategic” aspect of Sam’s
> > > initial
> > > > > > > questions.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can probably differentiate a brand change
> > and
> > > a
> > > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > > > separate efforts (or at the very least separate life
> > > cycles).
> > > > > > > Large
> > > > > > > > > > > > organizations that acquire startups and small companies
> > > often
> > > > > > > rebrand
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > acquired assets and their products to better fit their
> > > > > > > business/tech
> > > > > > > > > > > > strategy. However, underlying assets (repos, docs,
> > > materials)
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > > retrofit
> > > > > > > > > > > > at a slower burn.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think the first action item is probably a poll. I’m
> > > happy
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > pair/mob
> > > > > > > > > > > > (virtually or otherwise) on it with someone. Are there
> > > any
> > > > > > > particular
> > > > > > > > > > > > psychometrics we’d like to leverage (i.e. Likert?)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > @Walter, do you want to take a first stab at a poll?
> > > Maybe we
> > > > > > > can put
> > > > > > > > > > > > together a small tiger team to carry it out?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > From: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 28, 2022 at 18:45:07
> > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Defining a scope here is also fairly important. For
> > > example,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > apache.org domain name is fairly baked into a lot of
> > > > > > > unchangeable
> > > > > > > > > > > > places such as Java package names, every single
> > released
> > > > > > > artifact,
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > software license itself (which is used by tons of
> > people
> > > > > > outside
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > ASF), all the existing public URLs to things, email
> > > > > > addresses,
> > > > > > > > > > signing
> > > > > > > > > > > > keys, the GitHub organization name, tons of
> > > infrastructure
> > > > > > > > > > > > configuration, finance documents, corporate documents,
> > > > > > > trademarks,
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > surely other areas I'm forgetting.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > If we have a name change and only update the places
> > where
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > > > easy
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > do so, the name Apache will still be highly visible in
> > > tons
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > key
> > > > > > > > > > > > areas for the indefinite future. This isn't even
> > > considering
> > > > > > > > > > > > downstream users of Apache software, either, who may or
> > > may
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > adopt
> > > > > > > > > > > > a rename. These are some of the fairly intractable
> > > concerns
> > > > > > I've
> > > > > > > had
> > > > > > > > > > > > about a name change, and that's even after working with
> > > > > > another
> > > > > > > OSS
> > > > > > > > > > > > project that went through a name change and still has
> > > tons of
> > > > > > > > > > > > references to its old names due to compatibility
> > issues.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 3:49 PM Christian Grobmeier
> > > > > > > > > > > > <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, at 22:19, me wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Christian,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Were you thinking of an internal poll? That’s
> > > actually a
> > > > > > > > > > > spectacular
> > > > > > > > > > > > idea.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that was I was thinking. Basically a poll on
> > > members@,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > since
> > > > > > > > > > (I
> > > > > > > > > > > > guess) members would eventually decide on that
> > proposal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do we go about kicking that off?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not so sure either, but I guess writing the poll
> > > and
> > > > > > > proposing
> > > > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > to community@ would be a first step. Once decided on
> > the
> > > > > > > content we
> > > > > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > > vote on sending it, and then send it to members@
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Others may have different ideas, but that is my first
> > > idea
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for calling my idea spectacular, it gives me a
> > > warm
> > > > > > > feeling,
> > > > > > > > > > > > since I didn't think of it as such :)
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Christian
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed Mangini
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > me@emangini.com
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 28, 2022 at 15:43:04
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hello,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, at 20:57, me wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > The desire to make the change is definitely
> > > there. I
> > > > > > echo
> > > > > > > > > > > Walter’s
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > passion and statements.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I also agree w/ Sam that this isn’t going to be
> > > easy
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > accomplish.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Perhaps a starting point would be to answer
> > these
> > > > > > > questions in
> > > > > > > > > > > > concert:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - what is the LOE to perform the
> > > rebranding/renaming?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - are there enough volunteers within the
> > > organization
> > > > > > > willing
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > participate?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - what does the community think?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I want to emphasize that this last question is a
> > > point
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > no
> > > > > > > > > > > > return. If
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > we start creating surveys and asking about our
> > > brand,
> > > > > > it’s
> > > > > > > > > > going
> > > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > chum the waters.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Agreed. I would have thought to make a poll in the
> > > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > first-
> > > > > > > > > > > > briefly explain the issue and see what the community
> > > > > > > (non-binding)
> > > > > > > > > > vote
> > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > - just checking sentiments.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I am afraid there will be a lot of headwinds. But
> > > based
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > outcome one could decide if its more work to explain
> > the
> > > issue
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > actually
> > > > > > > > > > > > solve the issue.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Also a quick poll could stir up some people who
> > are
> > > > > > > interested
> > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > helping.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Cheers,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Christian
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > From: Walter Cameron <
> > > walter.lists@waltercameron.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > > > > dev@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Date: April 28, 2022 at 01:29:03
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > To: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 6:40 PM Sam Ruby <
> > > > > > > > > > rubys@intertwingly.net>
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> Walter: what are you personally willing to
> > > volunteer
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > do?
> > > > > > > > > > > What
> > > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> your plan? What resources do you need?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Honestly Sam the extent of my plan was to bring
> > > > > > attention
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > > issue and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > the harms it’s caused. Beyond that I’m kinda
> > > winging
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > but I
> > > > > > > > > > > > appreciate
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > your eagerness and openness to change. I had
> > > hoped I’d
> > > > > > > speak
> > > > > > > > > > up,
> > > > > > > > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > would finally pull their heads out of the sand
> > > and work
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > undo
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > harm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > they’ve caused.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > ASF’s brand violates its own CoC. You would
> > think
> > > that
> > > > > > > might
> > > > > > > > > > > spur
> > > > > > > > > > > > effort
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > for change by those perpetuating the harm, but
> > if
> > > you
> > > > > > > want me
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > work I’ll do whatever I can. I’m not that
> > familiar
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > details
> > > > > > > > > > > > of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > organization, surely not as familiar as one of
> > its
> > > > > > > Directors,
> > > > > > > > > > so
> > > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > a lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > of ways I don’t fully understand the scope of
> > what
> > > > > > needs
> > > > > > > to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > done, but
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I’m willing to volunteer a few weekends of my
> > > > > > rudimentary
> > > > > > > > > > > technical
> > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > design skills to run a “Find & Replace…” and put
> > > > > > together
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > > > > > logo or
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > whatever you think would be helpful in this
> > > effort. I
> > > > > > > haven’t
> > > > > > > > > > > > designed a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > logo in probably 15 years but I’m willing to
> > give
> > > it a
> > > > > > > try.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I would have assumed that an organization with a
> > > paid
> > > > > > > staff
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > goals to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > increase the diversity of its contributors and
> > > > > > continue
> > > > > > > > > > > receiving
> > > > > > > > > > > > corporate
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > donations would understand that the costs of
> > > inaction
> > > > > > > outweigh
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > costs of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > action here.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Let me know what else I can do to help.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Walter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > > > > dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > > > dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
Re: It’s time to change the name
Posted by Ed Mangini <me...@emangini.com>.
@Owen
That's not true with regards to complaints driving change.
A quick review of the history shows that initial commercial changes (e.g.
Washington Commanders) were mostly complaint driven, however community
changes were driven mostly by proxy as proactive efforts.
I think we need to be careful about making broad assumptions about what
tribes, partners or members would do before actually collecting that data.
Walter's initial statement is a proactive effort. This is very much in line
with "reading the room" rather than waiting to be told. To be fair, we
haven't even ascertained the impact of either. I've been reading up on the
Jeep scenario, and they did a substantial amount of research prior to
deciding that they should do research. (I.e. could they absorb the negative
impact).
The fact that we are a free software foundation dilutes revenue impact, but
we still have a footprint to consider (of which could be a polarizing
tangential discussion based on industry questions right now).
It might be worth looking at other OSS bodies in terms of DEI. (I'll dig in
to this in my free time today).
On Sun, May 1, 2022, 01:39 Owen Rubel <or...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well you may not need to.
>
> School and sports teams change their names because they are offensive and
> the tribe registers a complaint.
>
> In the sense of the Apache foundation, I sincerely donut the tribe will
> ever register an official complaint because it is a nonprofit that does
> community outreach and gives away software.
>
> They do not put the tribes image in a poor light nor do they use slogans,
> imagery that put the tribe in a poor light
>
> These are all things that would cause the Apache Nation to respond.
>
> The Apache Foundation has seemingly been a good steward so unless someone
> from the Apache Nation provides an official complaint, I would not worry.
>
> However... rebranding may be a good suggestion.
>
> Still some community outreach may be good so you can know if you even
> SHOULD start the path of rebranding; it may not even be necessary and you
> can put it to rest once and for all if they see you as good stewards.,
>
> Owen Rubel
> orubel@gmail.com
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 5:49 AM Ed Mangini <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
>
> > Creative!
> >
> > How do we change the original intent?
> >
> > Our website directly references the Apache tribe, and that data point is
> > referenced in various web assets of which we have no control.
> >
> > This is where Andrew's notion of outreach would be absolutely requisite
> to
> > determine if disassociation is enough. It might even require sponsorship.
> >
> > We'd need careful wordsmithing.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022, 05:03 Jarek Potiuk <ja...@potiuk.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I think we all vastly underestimate the ripple effect such a change
> might
> > > have.
> > > I do understand some of the sentiments of people who want change.
> > >
> > > However, maybe there is an easier way to handle this issue.
> > >
> > > Do we really have to change the name or just disassociate with the
> > > Apache Tribe ? I think the latter does not need name change and will
> > > be few orders of magnitude easier and possible to do in a few months
> > > rather than decades.
> > >
> > > For the vast majority of people in the software industry I think, the
> > > "Apache Software Foundation" bears absolutely no relation to the
> > > Apache Tribe. Why would it? Yeah originally it was a homage to some of
> > > the qualities of the Apache Tribe as the origin of the name is, and we
> > > do have the Feather which somewhat relates to the tribe. But for all
> > > practical purposes and mental association there is no relation between
> > > the two.
> > >
> > > I've been working in a trademark office for some time and from how I
> > > understand how names and brands are considered and used - "brands" and
> > > "names" can only be reserved in the "scope" they are registered for.
> > > So all Apache brand and naming is valid in "software" (and there the
> > > foundation obviously is associated with the name) - but there is
> > > nothing wrong (at least in the brand/trademark world) to have another
> > > "Apache" registered for another business (think Helicopters). Of
> > > course tribe is not a business, but I think the laws of trademark are
> > > simply reflecting the way people think about names and brands.
> > >
> > > While originally people who created The ASF have thought about some
> > > qualities associated with the Apache Tribe, true, but I think this was
> > > a very "loose" connection. Over the years Apache and The ASF actually
> > > "created from scratch" the meaning of the "Apache" word in the
> > > software industry. In this industry there is no "Apache Tribe" and
> > > never was, there is no other "Apache". What's even more - those
> > > qualities and properties chosen back there are not even the ones that
> > > bind the Apache Software Foundation together ("community over code").
> > > I think there was no real bad effect in the past that ASF would
> > > somewhat create for the tribe, but - more importantly - there was no
> > > piggy-backing I think. Since the name Apache was not really known in
> > > the industry, and the association with the Tribe was mostly in the
> > > minds of the people who created it and not in the minds of the users,
> > > you cannot really say that the ASF "abused" the name to build its
> > > position or otherwise build its reputation based on the Tribe itself.
> > > In a way it was just a name, one of many, that people creating the ASF
> > > could choose, and it was more for them than for the external world.
> > > Then they worked 20 years to build the quality and reputation of the
> > > "Apache" name in the software industry - without any piggybacking or
> > > abusing of the association, I think. So in a way expecting to throw
> > > back these 20 years of brand-building in a completely new industry is
> > > not really too "symmetrical" I believe.
> > >
> > > Since the connection is so "loose", I would say we have the option to
> > > simply formally disassociate the meaning from the Tribe but leave the
> > > name Apache with the foundation.
> > >
> > > Why don't we simply:
> > >
> > > * change the explanation of the name (And figure out some nice acronym
> > > that APACHE might stand for - we can even vote on some proposals
> > > there).
> > > * remove the Feather from the logo and replace it with something more
> > > abstract (yet another opportunity to get some members energized around
> > > proposing and voting for a new logo)
> > > * ask the few projects that might get an explicit association with the
> > > Tribe (Arrow? Geronimo?) to change their names - that will be
> > > immensely easier than changing the Foundation name
> > > * to formally disassociate the meaning while also adding a homage for
> > > the past association to the Tribe while we are separating the meaning
> > >
> > > Of course - maybe I just do not understand the feelings, and desired
> > > of those who feel strongly about the association, but I think the fact
> > > of life is that the same names might mean different things, and in the
> > > software industry "Apache" is the foundation. In the "People's"
> > > business - it's the Tribe. Why don't we formally separate those two
> > > simply?
> > >
> > > J.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 1:31 AM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 100% with you about the mechanics of a poll.
> > > >
> > > > It is absolutely necessary to have a clearly defined goal,
> hypothesis,
> > > etc. before we can drive a poll. I think coming up with those
> questions
> > is
> > > part of what we’re chatting about. That in itself can be a challenge. I
> > > agree about multiple options. (That’s where I was going w/ a Likert
> > scale).
> > > >
> > > > In terms of LOE, there might be ways to mitigate some of the burden.
> > DEI
> > > efforts have never been as important to people as they are right now.
> > There
> > > are a lot of orgs willing to invest in that. Fundraising can easily
> turn
> > > into contracting fees. (I also work for a pretty large global
> consultancy
> > > whose core values are heavily focused on DEI, I’d be happy to socialize
> > the
> > > effort. PMs, Devs, UX, CX, and so on. )
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > From: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 18:21:26
> > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > >
> > > > Schools and sports teams changing their names is trivial in
> comparison
> > > > to the scope of work here. How many schools or sports teams have
> their
> > > > name as part of APIs? This is on the level of deprecating .com in DNS
> > > > in favor of something else.
> > > >
> > > > The concrete ideas like a new logo sound far more tractable, as would
> > > > things like no longer allowing new ASF projects to name themselves
> > > > after native culture.
> > > >
> > > > As for a poll about willingness to change the name, I don't think
> > > > there will be useful results from such a poll without a more specific
> > > > set of questions. Perhaps aiming it towards a spectrum of options on
> > > > how to proceed with one end being no change and the other end being
> > > > full rename could be useful? For example, suppose there's much more
> > > > support in doing something like a logo change versus a name change;
> it
> > > > wouldn't be productive to poll about binary options as we wouldn't be
> > > > able to figure out which options may already be widely supported.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 4:10 PM Walter Cameron
> > > > <wa...@waltercameron.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm encouraged by the appetite for change expressed here,
> gunalchéesh
> > > to
> > > > > everyone for hearing me out and sharing your ideas and fleshing out
> > > more of
> > > > > a plan.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with everyone here that it’s a mountain of work to change
> the
> > > name,
> > > > > it took years to get us to this point and Myrle is right it will
> take
> > > > > decades to correct. I’ll do whatever I can and I’m sure others will
> > > also
> > > > > but decolonizing open source will take generations. It took the
> > > Washington
> > > > > Football Team a few seasons to pick a new name. I’m not saying a
> > > stopgap
> > > > > name is needed, but maybe just a commitment to changing the name
> from
> > > the
> > > > > membership could be a first point added to Myrle's outline. My gut
> > also
> > > > > says that despite the work, even the larger software community
> would
> > > > > welcome a new name.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think Ed is right that educating and driving the community to
> enact
> > > > > change will be a group effort. Maybe if a vote or poll of the
> > > membership
> > > > > indicated an openness to change that would encourage further effort
> > and
> > > > > volunteers to do the work. I know I’ve been in a lot of groups
> where
> > > people
> > > > > knowingly went down the wrong path just because they thought that’s
> > > what
> > > > > the group wanted, when really everyone was just following everyone
> > > else and
> > > > > maybe ASF’s branding is just such a situation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Walter
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:44 PM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I’m also willing to take on some of the tasks. I do want to point
> > > out that
> > > > > > if we over-decompose the problem, we’re just going to push the
> > > perception
> > > > > > of it being one problem that is too big to too many problems.
> Many
> > > of the
> > > > > > tasks and work are going to fail into categories, and there are
> > > going to be
> > > > > > many different ways to categorize the problems (hopefully to
> > > minimize the
> > > > > > impact of some of those dependencies).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I’m curious why there has to be one single person to “drive” the
> > > effort.
> > > > > > If we have a sufficient number of people (but not too many) that
> > are
> > > > > > willing to take on some of the tasks, why can’t those tasks be to
> > > drive it
> > > > > > by committee?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: Myrle Krantz <my...@apache.org>
> > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 15:35:06
> > > > > > To: Community <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Walter,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The assertion that we have paid staff, while correct, isn't
> > > particularly
> > > > > > relevant to the question. All of the top level leadership
> positions
> > > at
> > > > > > The
> > > > > > Foundation are unpaid volunteer roles, including
> > > > > > * President,
> > > > > > * Executive Vice President,
> > > > > > * VP Infra,
> > > > > > * VP Brand,
> > > > > > * VP Fundraising,
> > > > > > * Treasurer,
> > > > > > * VP Legal,
> > > > > > * VP Conferences,
> > > > > > * VP Privacy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Contractors have contracts with (more or less) well-defined
> scopes
> > > that
> > > > > > can't be expanded to include this kind of ad hoc work, without
> > > contract
> > > > > > negotiations, and added costs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All of these volunteers are doing this work in their free time
> > while
> > > also
> > > > > > doing the work the use to put food on their family's tables.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That having been said, my gut tells me that the majority of The
> > > > > > Foundation
> > > > > > members agree that the name is sub-optimal. People just don't
> know
> > > how to
> > > > > > fix it. IMO: The first step would be to break the change you are
> > > asking
> > > > > > for down into steps small enough that people can imagine taking
> > them
> > > on,
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > that it is possible to contract out under the oversight of a
> > > volunteer.
> > > > > > Y'all check me, but I see:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > * Picking a new name and achieving consensus that it's the right
> > > name.
> > > > > > * Legally changing the name of The Foundation itself.
> > > > > > * Understanding how this affects the many business relationships
> > the
> > > > > > Foundation has, and mitigating those effects.
> > > > > > * Designing new names and logos for the many brands The
> Foundation
> > > owns,
> > > > > > including project branding (eg "Apache Cassandra") the feather
> > logo,
> > > the
> > > > > > incubator logo, etc.
> > > > > > * Registering a new website domain.
> > > > > > * Namespaces/packages/artifact names/etc in The Foundation's many
> > > > > > projects.
> > > > > > * Getting OSI approval for a new license identical to "Apache
> > License
> > > > > > 2.0",
> > > > > > but under a new name. Getting that new license listed in various
> > > license
> > > > > > pickers.
> > > > > > * Marketing the new name so that it reaches a similar level of
> > > > > > recognition
> > > > > > as the old name.
> > > > > > * ...all the things I didn't think of.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Some of this work will cross multiple jurisdictions. For example
> > > there
> > > > > > has
> > > > > > already been significant effort that I don't fully understand
> > > > > > establishing
> > > > > > Apache branding in China. Those efforts would have to be
> restarted.
> > > You'd
> > > > > > need to get support from our Chinese members.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are dependencies between some of these items. For example,
> > you
> > > > > > should get a new website domain before you can change artifact
> > names.
> > > > > > Possibly you would leave old artifacts with the old name, and
> only
> > > use
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > new name for new artifacts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Each of these tasks would touch a different set of areas of The
> > > > > > Foundation. For example, legally changing the Foundation's name
> > would
> > > > > > fall
> > > > > > under VP Legal. Infra would have to register new domain names,
> and
> > > set up
> > > > > > redirects, including to the ApacheCon domains. VP Conferences
> would
> > > have
> > > > > > to adjust the conference branding. VP Fundraising might need to
> > > notify
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > of our sponsors. etc. All in all this would be thousands of hours
> > of
> > > > > > work, that would need coordinating across multiple volunteers who
> > are
> > > > > > interested in doing a good job, but not necessarily able to
> respond
> > > to
> > > > > > tasks on deadlines. And at the end it would certainly be
> impossible
> > > to
> > > > > > fully complete it, because for example, changing package names
> > would
> > > > > > break
> > > > > > client code.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Despite the complexity of the full change, some of these tasks
> are
> > > > > > independent of the others and can be taken on without an
> > expectation
> > > that
> > > > > > all tasks would be completed. For example, registering a new
> domain
> > > name,
> > > > > > and developing a consensus that it can be used instead of
> "apache"
> > > in new
> > > > > > projects might be possible without doing a full-on name change.
> > > > > > Introducing the same license under a new name might also be
> > > possible. And
> > > > > > replacing our logo with something more respectful might also be
> > > possible
> > > > > > without touching anything else. To tease out tasks like this
> would
> > > > > > require
> > > > > > someone with an interest in doing the hard work of decomposing
> the
> > > > > > problem,
> > > > > > discovering which pieces are independently solvable, developing
> > > consensus
> > > > > > that a change should be made, and then doing each change itself.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please recognize that to fully complete what I'm describing here
> > will
> > > > > > take
> > > > > > years, possibly more than a decade of work, and that it will
> > probably
> > > > > > never
> > > > > > be fully completed, and that it will require buy-in from
> hundreds,
> > > > > > possibly
> > > > > > thousands of people. To achieve full buy-in, you'd need to
> convince
> > > > > > people
> > > > > > not only that the work is worth doing, but also that you are in
> it
> > > for as
> > > > > > long as the task will take. With all that as context: if someone
> is
> > > > > > willing to do that work of driving that effort, then I'm willing
> to
> > > take
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > some individual tasks in the process that fall within my area of
> > > > > > expertise. But I personally am not willing to *drive* that
> effort,
> > > and I
> > > > > > haven't seen that anyone else is willing to either.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Walter, when someone replies "You want this change, but are you
> > > willing
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > do the work?" this may be what they are asking. Despite all of
> > that,
> > > your
> > > > > > statements about the disrespect of the name and the logos, and
> some
> > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > project names are valid. The hurt you describe is real. And I
> wish
> > it
> > > > > > weren't so.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > > > > > Myrle Krantz
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 8:24 PM Julian Hyde <jh...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it would be useful to poll ASF members' opinions. This
> > > would
> > > > > > > not be a vote (in the sense that any action would result if the
> > > vote
> > > > > > > 'passes') even though we may choose to implement the poll using
> > > STevE
> > > > > > > during a members meeting. It would allow us to gauge where
> > opinions
> > > > > > > are, and track changes in members' opinions over time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As others have noted, a discussion followed by a vote would
> > likely
> > > be
> > > > > > > divisive, because the discussion would be dominated by those
> with
> > > the
> > > > > > > most polarized opinions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Julian
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 10:36 AM me <me...@emangini.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks Sam and Andrew for helping provide visibility!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > From: Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>
> > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 13:35:41
> > > > > > > > To: Apache Community Dev <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Moving board to bcc. Mixing public and private mailing lists
> is
> > > not a
> > > > > > > > good idea.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 12:48 PM Andrew Musselman <
> > > akm@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Copying them now.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 9:46 AM me <me...@emangini.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > @Andrew,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > How do we engage the board?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ed Mangini
> > > > > > > > > > me@emangini.com
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Musselman <ak...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 12:44:28
> > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <de...@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 8:28 AM me <me...@emangini.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Andrew,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I agree that putting it to a member vote is possibly
> > > polarizing
> > > > > > > (and
> > > > > > > > > > > premature). That’s not really the intent here. A poll
> is
> > a
> > > > > > dipstick
> > > > > > > > > > effort
> > > > > > > > > > > to check the temperature before we reach strategy and
> > > tactics.
> > > > > > > Polling
> > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > more about discovery.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think you'll get a similar reaction from a poll.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I personally think a poll is premature. At the moment, you
> > don't
> > > have
> > > > > > > > a proposed name, scope, or size of effort. Without a
> > definition,
> > > it
> > > > > > > > isn't clear what people will be expressing support for (or
> > > against).
> > > > > > > > It is OK to leave some parts TBD for a poll, but for a poll
> to
> > be
> > > > > > > > useful there needs to be some substance.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I’m all for the outreach. For my own clarification, are
> > you
> > > > > > > looking at
> > > > > > > > > > > this as a means of defining boundaries on the effort,
> > > setting
> > > > > > > urgency
> > > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > the efforts (or some combination of both?)
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think this is such an expansive and encompassing topic
> > that
> > > > > > covers
> > > > > > > > > > almost
> > > > > > > > > > every aspect of the operations of the foundation that it
> > > might be
> > > > > > > smart
> > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > the board to have a look and build up a plan before doing
> > > any ad
> > > > > > hoc
> > > > > > > > > > outreach.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Is this something you’re willing to do or kick off?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I personally don't have bandwidth to participate in
> > > activities on
> > > > > > > this,
> > > > > > > > > > no.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Is there any reason why we can’t move forward with
> both a
> > > poll
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > outreach?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Again I think this is a board decision but I am not a
> > lawyer.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Board decision will come much later. Meanwhile, many board
> > > members
> > > > > > > > watch this list.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - Sam Ruby
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > From: Andrew Musselman <ak...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 29, 2022 at 10:14:05
> > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <dev@community.apache.org
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Cc: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Speaking as someone in the Pacific Northwest US, where
> we
> > > say
> > > > > > land
> > > > > > > > > > > acknowledgement for the Duwamish tribe at the beginning
> > of
> > > all
> > > > > > > school
> > > > > > > > > > > events, meaning I respect and understand the motivation
> > for
> > > > > > this:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I think simply opening this up for a member vote will
> > > result in
> > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > > unproductive firefight. Reactions will range from
> > > enthusiastic
> > > > > > > sympathy
> > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > bewildered annoyance to outright hostile accusations.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Can I propose an outreach to some Apache tribe
> > governments
> > > so
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > open
> > > > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > dialog with them directly, and start to understand what
> > > their
> > > > > > > official
> > > > > > > > > > > experience of the ASF branding is?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Then we could formulate a plan after some deliberation.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > The plan could include logo redesign if the feather
> > symbol
> > > is
> > > > > > > viewed as
> > > > > > > > > > > insensitive, for example, and other changes balanced
> with
> > > > > > > feasibility
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > community values.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Best
> > > > > > > > > > > Andrew
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 29, 2022 at 6:29 AM me <me...@emangini.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > @Christian
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > You’re very welcome! I think an internal poll has a
> > > great way
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > defining
> > > > > > > > > > > > footholds. It’s going to be hard to craft to avoid
> > > > > > confirmation
> > > > > > > bias,
> > > > > > > > > > > but I
> > > > > > > > > > > > think it’s definitely possible.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > @Matt
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I agree. There is no doubt that this is something
> that
> > > would
> > > > > > > require
> > > > > > > > > > > > stages. Approaching this “Big Bang” style is going to
> > > fail
> > > > > > pretty
> > > > > > > > > > > quickly.
> > > > > > > > > > > > I’m thinking the effort is going to be an amalgam of
> > the
> > > > > > > Washington
> > > > > > > > > > > > Redskins -> Commanders effort + the migration from
> > JUnit
> > > 4 to
> > > > > > 5.
> > > > > > > This
> > > > > > > > > > > > definitely hits on the “strategic” aspect of Sam’s
> > > initial
> > > > > > > questions.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think we can probably differentiate a brand change
> > and
> > > a
> > > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > > change
> > > > > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > > > > separate efforts (or at the very least separate life
> > > cycles).
> > > > > > > Large
> > > > > > > > > > > > organizations that acquire startups and small
> companies
> > > often
> > > > > > > rebrand
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > acquired assets and their products to better fit
> their
> > > > > > > business/tech
> > > > > > > > > > > > strategy. However, underlying assets (repos, docs,
> > > materials)
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > > > > > retrofit
> > > > > > > > > > > > at a slower burn.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think the first action item is probably a poll. I’m
> > > happy
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > pair/mob
> > > > > > > > > > > > (virtually or otherwise) on it with someone. Are
> there
> > > any
> > > > > > > particular
> > > > > > > > > > > > psychometrics we’d like to leverage (i.e. Likert?)
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > @Walter, do you want to take a first stab at a poll?
> > > Maybe we
> > > > > > > can put
> > > > > > > > > > > > together a small tiger team to carry it out?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > From: Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 28, 2022 at 18:45:07
> > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <
> dev@community.apache.org
> > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Defining a scope here is also fairly important. For
> > > example,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > apache.org domain name is fairly baked into a lot of
> > > > > > > unchangeable
> > > > > > > > > > > > places such as Java package names, every single
> > released
> > > > > > > artifact,
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > software license itself (which is used by tons of
> > people
> > > > > > outside
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > > > ASF), all the existing public URLs to things, email
> > > > > > addresses,
> > > > > > > > > > signing
> > > > > > > > > > > > keys, the GitHub organization name, tons of
> > > infrastructure
> > > > > > > > > > > > configuration, finance documents, corporate
> documents,
> > > > > > > trademarks,
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > surely other areas I'm forgetting.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > If we have a name change and only update the places
> > where
> > > > > > it's
> > > > > > > easy
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > do so, the name Apache will still be highly visible
> in
> > > tons
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > key
> > > > > > > > > > > > areas for the indefinite future. This isn't even
> > > considering
> > > > > > > > > > > > downstream users of Apache software, either, who may
> or
> > > may
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > > adopt
> > > > > > > > > > > > a rename. These are some of the fairly intractable
> > > concerns
> > > > > > I've
> > > > > > > had
> > > > > > > > > > > > about a name change, and that's even after working
> with
> > > > > > another
> > > > > > > OSS
> > > > > > > > > > > > project that went through a name change and still has
> > > tons of
> > > > > > > > > > > > references to its old names due to compatibility
> > issues.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 3:49 PM Christian Grobmeier
> > > > > > > > > > > > <gr...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, at 22:19, me wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Christian,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Were you thinking of an internal poll? That’s
> > > actually a
> > > > > > > > > > > spectacular
> > > > > > > > > > > > idea.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, that was I was thinking. Basically a poll on
> > > members@,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > since
> > > > > > > > > > (I
> > > > > > > > > > > > guess) members would eventually decide on that
> > proposal.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do we go about kicking that off?
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not so sure either, but I guess writing the
> poll
> > > and
> > > > > > > proposing
> > > > > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > > > > to community@ would be a first step. Once decided on
> > the
> > > > > > > content we
> > > > > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > > > > > vote on sending it, and then send it to members@
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Others may have different ideas, but that is my
> first
> > > idea
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for calling my idea spectacular, it gives
> me a
> > > warm
> > > > > > > feeling,
> > > > > > > > > > > > since I didn't think of it as such :)
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Christian
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ed Mangini
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > me@emangini.com
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Christian Grobmeier <gr...@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Date: April 28, 2022 at 15:43:04
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Hello,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thu, Apr 28, 2022, at 20:57, me wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > The desire to make the change is definitely
> > > there. I
> > > > > > echo
> > > > > > > > > > > Walter’s
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > passion and statements.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I also agree w/ Sam that this isn’t going to
> be
> > > easy
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > accomplish.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Perhaps a starting point would be to answer
> > these
> > > > > > > questions in
> > > > > > > > > > > > concert:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - what is the LOE to perform the
> > > rebranding/renaming?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - are there enough volunteers within the
> > > organization
> > > > > > > willing
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > participate?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > - what does the community think?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I want to emphasize that this last question
> is a
> > > point
> > > > > > of
> > > > > > > no
> > > > > > > > > > > > return. If
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > we start creating surveys and asking about our
> > > brand,
> > > > > > it’s
> > > > > > > > > > going
> > > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > chum the waters.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Agreed. I would have thought to make a poll in
> the
> > > > > > community
> > > > > > > > > > > first-
> > > > > > > > > > > > briefly explain the issue and see what the community
> > > > > > > (non-binding)
> > > > > > > > > > vote
> > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > - just checking sentiments.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> I am afraid there will be a lot of headwinds.
> But
> > > based
> > > > > > on
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > outcome one could decide if its more work to explain
> > the
> > > issue
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > > > > actually
> > > > > > > > > > > > solve the issue.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Also a quick poll could stir up some people who
> > are
> > > > > > > interested
> > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > helping.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Cheers,
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Christian
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > From: Walter Cameron <
> > > walter.lists@waltercameron.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Reply: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > > > > dev@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Date: April 28, 2022 at 01:29:03
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > To: dev@community.apache.org <
> > > dev@community.apache.org>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Subject: Re: It’s time to change the name
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 6:40 PM Sam Ruby <
> > > > > > > > > > rubys@intertwingly.net>
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> Walter: what are you personally willing to
> > > volunteer
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > do?
> > > > > > > > > > > What
> > > > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >> your plan? What resources do you need?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Honestly Sam the extent of my plan was to
> bring
> > > > > > attention
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > > issue and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > the harms it’s caused. Beyond that I’m kinda
> > > winging
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > but I
> > > > > > > > > > > > appreciate
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > your eagerness and openness to change. I had
> > > hoped I’d
> > > > > > > speak
> > > > > > > > > > up,
> > > > > > > > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > would finally pull their heads out of the sand
> > > and work
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > undo
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > harm
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > they’ve caused.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > ASF’s brand violates its own CoC. You would
> > think
> > > that
> > > > > > > might
> > > > > > > > > > > spur
> > > > > > > > > > > > effort
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > for change by those perpetuating the harm, but
> > if
> > > you
> > > > > > > want me
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > work I’ll do whatever I can. I’m not that
> > familiar
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > details
> > > > > > > > > > > > of the
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > organization, surely not as familiar as one of
> > its
> > > > > > > Directors,
> > > > > > > > > > so
> > > > > > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > > > > > > a lot
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > of ways I don’t fully understand the scope of
> > what
> > > > > > needs
> > > > > > > to be
> > > > > > > > > > > > done, but
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I’m willing to volunteer a few weekends of my
> > > > > > rudimentary
> > > > > > > > > > > technical
> > > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > design skills to run a “Find & Replace…” and
> put
> > > > > > together
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > new
> > > > > > > > > > > > logo or
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > whatever you think would be helpful in this
> > > effort. I
> > > > > > > haven’t
> > > > > > > > > > > > designed a
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > logo in probably 15 years but I’m willing to
> > give
> > > it a
> > > > > > > try.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > I would have assumed that an organization
> with a
> > > paid
> > > > > > > staff
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > > goals to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > increase the diversity of its contributors and
> > > > > > continue
> > > > > > > > > > > receiving
> > > > > > > > > > > > corporate
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > donations would understand that the costs of
> > > inaction
> > > > > > > outweigh
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > > costs of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > action here.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Let me know what else I can do to help.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Walter
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > > > > > dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > > > > dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > > dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@community.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@community.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
>