You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@creadur.apache.org by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org> on 2011/12/10 02:45:13 UTC

Description and Scope statement

The upcoming resolution [1] needs to define a
"Description and scope" statement.

In the template [2] the statement used in two places.
Here is the second:

  RESOLVED, that the Apache ${PROJECT} Project be and hereby is
  responsible for the creation and maintenance of software
  related to ${DESCRIPTION-AND-SCOPE};
  and be it further

Probably should look at recent resolutions to ensure
that template is current.

A suggestion:
  related to comprehension and auditing of software distributions


We also need a concise description for use on the website,
at Incubator podlings.xml metadata, reports, etcetera.

  The Apache Creadur (tm) Project provides a suite of tools for
  the comprehension and auditing of software distributions.


Should we also have a concise description for each product, e.g.
The Apache Creadur RAT (tm) software ...
The Apache Creadur Whisker (tm) software ...

I presume that we use a product's full name on the first mention,
"Apache Creadur Whisker" and thereafter refer to it
as "Apache Whisker" or just "Whisker". Is that correct?

[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#tlp-resolution
[2] https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/board/templates/podling-tlp-resolution.txt

-David

Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-12-21, David Crossley wrote:

> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

>> I've been wondering whether whether just using one plain HTML document
>> for the project website might work well. Opinions?

> I like the idea of keeping things simple. However, they tend to
> grow and need other bits.

> I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.

> Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation system
> (e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.

+1

Stefan

Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
On 12/21/11 00:32, David Crossley wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>>
>> I've been wondering whether whether just using one plain HTML document
>> for the project website might work well. Opinions?
> 
> I like the idea of keeping things simple. However, they tend to
> grow and need other bits.
> 
> I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.

Fine by me

> Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation system
> (e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.

+1

Robert

Re: using Apache CMS

Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
On 12/23/11 16:04, David Blevins wrote:
> 
> On Dec 23, 2011, at 6:26 AM, John W Vines wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> | From: "Robert Burrell Donkin" <rd...@apache.org>
>> | To: rat-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> | Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 7:33:38 AM
>> | Subject: Re: using Apache CMS
>> | On 12/23/11 08:16, David Crossley wrote:
>> | > David Blevins wrote:
>> | >> David Crossley wrote:
>> | >>>
>> | >>> I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.
>> | >>>
>> | >>> Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation
>> | >>> system
>> | >>> (e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.
>> | >>
>> | >> +1
>> | >>
>> | >> I'm a big fan of the CMS.
>> | >
>> | > Great. I have only used it a little via the
>> | > alternate back end.
>> | > So here would be a good place to get started.
>> | >
>> | > However, i could not be the prime mover, just a helper.
>> | 
>> | Anyone know what's needed? Is it just a case of asking infrastructure?
>> | 
>> | Robert
>>
>>
>> Sounds right, I think it's just an INFRA ticket.
> 
> Pretty much.  Really the hardest thing is deciding on your template.
> 
> We could get it hooked up now if we wanted.  Not that much work to update the svn urls post graduation.
> 
> I'd be happy to move this forward if people like the idea of using the CMS.

+1

Robert

Re: using Apache CMS

Posted by Hugo Hirsch <as...@hugo-hirsch.de>.
Am 23.12.2011 21:00, schrieb Stefan Bodewig:
>> I'd be happy to move this forward if people like the idea of using the
>> CMS.
> 
> +1 and thank you

+1

Although I'd prefer a plain wiki - but I assume an Apache solution will
be more future proof.

Merry xmas.

Hugo

Re: using Apache CMS

Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-12-23, David Blevins wrote:

> We could get it hooked up now if we wanted.  Not that much work to
> update the svn urls post graduation.

> I'd be happy to move this forward if people like the idea of using the
> CMS.

+1 and thank you

       Stefan

Re: using Apache CMS

Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
David Blevins wrote:
> John W Vines wrote:
> > 
> > Sounds right, I think it's just an INFRA ticket.
> 
> Pretty much.  Really the hardest thing is deciding on your template.
> 
> We could get it hooked up now if we wanted.  Not that much work to update the svn urls post graduation.
> 
> I'd be happy to move this forward if people like the idea of using the CMS.

Yes please. I will try to create some time to help.

We encourage any new contributor to help with it.
Some docs: 
http://wiki.apache.org/general/ApacheCms2010
http://wiki.apache.org/general/ApacheCMSFAQ
http://www.apache.org/dev/cmsref.html

Found this while wandering:

How do we get started for our project?
http://wiki.apache.org/general/ApacheCMSFAQ#How_do_we_get_started_for_our_project.3F

-David

Re: using Apache CMS

Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 23, 2011, at 6:26 AM, John W Vines wrote:

> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Robert Burrell Donkin" <rd...@apache.org>
> | To: rat-dev@incubator.apache.org
> | Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 7:33:38 AM
> | Subject: Re: using Apache CMS
> | On 12/23/11 08:16, David Crossley wrote:
> | > David Blevins wrote:
> | >> David Crossley wrote:
> | >>>
> | >>> I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.
> | >>>
> | >>> Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation
> | >>> system
> | >>> (e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.
> | >>
> | >> +1
> | >>
> | >> I'm a big fan of the CMS.
> | >
> | > Great. I have only used it a little via the
> | > alternate back end.
> | > So here would be a good place to get started.
> | >
> | > However, i could not be the prime mover, just a helper.
> | 
> | Anyone know what's needed? Is it just a case of asking infrastructure?
> | 
> | Robert
> 
> 
> Sounds right, I think it's just an INFRA ticket.

Pretty much.  Really the hardest thing is deciding on your template.

We could get it hooked up now if we wanted.  Not that much work to update the svn urls post graduation.

I'd be happy to move this forward if people like the idea of using the CMS.


-David


Re: using Apache CMS

Posted by John W Vines <jo...@ugov.gov>.

----- Original Message -----
| From: "Robert Burrell Donkin" <rd...@apache.org>
| To: rat-dev@incubator.apache.org
| Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 7:33:38 AM
| Subject: Re: using Apache CMS
| On 12/23/11 08:16, David Crossley wrote:
| > David Blevins wrote:
| >> David Crossley wrote:
| >>>
| >>> I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.
| >>>
| >>> Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation
| >>> system
| >>> (e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.
| >>
| >> +1
| >>
| >> I'm a big fan of the CMS.
| >
| > Great. I have only used it a little via the
| > alternate back end.
| > So here would be a good place to get started.
| >
| > However, i could not be the prime mover, just a helper.
| 
| Anyone know what's needed? Is it just a case of asking infrastructure?
| 
| Robert


Sounds right, I think it's just an INFRA ticket.

John

Re: using Apache CMS

Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
On 12/23/11 08:16, David Crossley wrote:
> David Blevins wrote:
>> David Crossley wrote:
>>>
>>> I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.
>>>
>>> Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation system
>>> (e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I'm a big fan of the CMS.
> 
> Great. I have only used it a little via the
> alternate back end.
> So here would be a good place to get started.
> 
> However, i could not be the prime mover, just a helper.

Anyone know what's needed? Is it just a case of asking infrastructure?

Robert

using Apache CMS

Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
David Blevins wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.
> > 
> > Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation system
> > (e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.
> 
> +1
> 
> I'm a big fan of the CMS.

Great. I have only used it a little via the
alternate back end.
So here would be a good place to get started.

However, i could not be the prime mover, just a helper.

-David

Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 20, 2011, at 4:32 PM, David Crossley wrote:

> I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.
> 
> Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation system
> (e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.

+1

I'm a big fan of the CMS.


-David


Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> 
> I've been wondering whether whether just using one plain HTML document
> for the project website might work well. Opinions?

I like the idea of keeping things simple. However, they tend to
grow and need other bits.

I was wondering if using the Apache CMS would be the best.

Perhaps each specific product would use its own documentation system
(e.g. some use Maven). Default being the CMS.

> > Should we also have a concise description for each product, e.g.
> > The Apache Creadur RAT (tm) software ...
> > The Apache Creadur Whisker (tm) software ...
> 
> "Apache Rat" and "Apache Whisker" would also be fine. Since these names
> are simple and are already established, I'm inclined to stick with them.

See the rest below.

> We'll need to ship a "Apache Creadur" bundle containing every product.
> 
> > I presume that we use a product's full name on the first mention,
> > "Apache Creadur Whisker" and thereafter refer to it
> > as "Apache Whisker" or just "Whisker". Is that correct?
> 
> +1
> 
> Robert
> 
> > [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#tlp-resolution
> > [2] https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/board/templates/podling-tlp-resolution.txt
> > 
> > -David
> > 
> 

Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
On 12/21/11 22:10, David Blevins wrote:
> 
> On Dec 20, 2011, at 1:03 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> 
>> On 12/20/11 20:25, David Blevins wrote:
>>>
>>> On Dec 20, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Apache Rat" and "Apache Whisker" would also be fine. Since these names
>>>> are simple and are already established, I'm inclined to stick with them.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>>
>>>> We'll need to ship a "Apache Creadur" bundle containing every product.
>>>
>>> I'd have thought the individual releases would be adequate.
>>
>> AIUI trademarks only apply to products that ship. Since branding
>> requires TLP names and components are trademarkable, I think this means
>> we need to ship a product called "Apache Creadur".
> 
> You can trademark all sorts of things that are not products.  Slogans, logos, etc.

This is true for big commercial entities with good trademark lawyers

> The trademark identifies the source of products and services.  Apache Creadur would be a source of both products and services.  
> Those would include "creadur.apache.org" website, "@creadur.apache.org" mailing lists, http://svn.apache.org/.../creadur repository, mirrored http://www.apache.org/dist/creadur download space, org.apache.creadur maven groupId.
> 
> That seems like way more than enough to me.

AIUI the United States Patent and Trademark Office seems take a tough
line with internet only products and services without significant
commercial backing...

> We can certainly have an all-in-one bundle if we want to and feel it has value, but I wouldn't want to see us do it for legal reasons.  
> Misinformation like that has a way of spreading and becomes really hard to kill.

Ok - let me rephrase: we may end up having to ship an all-in-one product
for legal or policy reasons at some time in the future.

Robert

Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 20, 2011, at 1:03 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

> On 12/20/11 20:25, David Blevins wrote:
>> 
>> On Dec 20, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>> 
>>> "Apache Rat" and "Apache Whisker" would also be fine. Since these names
>>> are simple and are already established, I'm inclined to stick with them.
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>>> 
>>> We'll need to ship a "Apache Creadur" bundle containing every product.
>> 
>> I'd have thought the individual releases would be adequate.
> 
> AIUI trademarks only apply to products that ship. Since branding
> requires TLP names and components are trademarkable, I think this means
> we need to ship a product called "Apache Creadur".

You can trademark all sorts of things that are not products.  Slogans, logos, etc.

The trademark identifies the source of products and services.  Apache Creadur would be a source of both products and services.  Those would include "creadur.apache.org" website, "@creadur.apache.org" mailing lists, http://svn.apache.org/.../creadur repository, mirrored http://www.apache.org/dist/creadur download space, org.apache.creadur maven groupId.

That seems like way more than enough to me.

We can certainly have an all-in-one bundle if we want to and feel it has value, but I wouldn't want to see us do it for legal reasons.  Misinformation like that has a way of spreading and becomes really hard to kill.

My $0.02 at least.


-David


Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
On 12/21/11 00:48, David Crossley wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>> David Blevins wrote:
>>> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Apache Rat" and "Apache Whisker" would also be fine. Since these names
>>>> are simple and are already established, I'm inclined to stick with them.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>>
>>>> We'll need to ship a "Apache Creadur" bundle containing every product.
>>>
>>> I'd have thought the individual releases would be adequate.
>>
>> AIUI trademarks only apply to products that ship. Since branding
>> requires TLP names and components are trademarkable, I think this means
>> we need to ship a product called "Apache Creadur".
> 
> Would this be solved by going with the naming suggestion
> in the other part of this thread?
> i.e.
> Call it "Apache Creadur Whisker" on first mention
> and "Apache Whisker" and "Whisker" thereafter.

Not sure :-/

> Could we do both? Release each product when it needs to.
> Release a bundle on a regular basis which contains the
> most recent version of anything that is released.

+1

Robert

Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by David Crossley <cr...@apache.org>.
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> David Blevins wrote:
> > Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> > 
> >> "Apache Rat" and "Apache Whisker" would also be fine. Since these names
> >> are simple and are already established, I'm inclined to stick with them.
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> >>
> >> We'll need to ship a "Apache Creadur" bundle containing every product.
> > 
> > I'd have thought the individual releases would be adequate.
> 
> AIUI trademarks only apply to products that ship. Since branding
> requires TLP names and components are trademarkable, I think this means
> we need to ship a product called "Apache Creadur".

Would this be solved by going with the naming suggestion
in the other part of this thread?
i.e.
Call it "Apache Creadur Whisker" on first mention
and "Apache Whisker" and "Whisker" thereafter.
 
Could we do both? Release each product when it needs to.
Release a bundle on a regular basis which contains the
most recent version of anything that is released.

-David

Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
On 12/20/11 20:25, David Blevins wrote:
> 
> On Dec 20, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> 
>> "Apache Rat" and "Apache Whisker" would also be fine. Since these names
>> are simple and are already established, I'm inclined to stick with them.
> 
> +1
> 
>>
>> We'll need to ship a "Apache Creadur" bundle containing every product.
> 
> I'd have thought the individual releases would be adequate.

AIUI trademarks only apply to products that ship. Since branding
requires TLP names and components are trademarkable, I think this means
we need to ship a product called "Apache Creadur".

Robert

Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by David Blevins <da...@gmail.com>.
On Dec 20, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

> "Apache Rat" and "Apache Whisker" would also be fine. Since these names
> are simple and are already established, I'm inclined to stick with them.

+1

> 
> We'll need to ship a "Apache Creadur" bundle containing every product.

I'd have thought the individual releases would be adequate.


-David


Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <rd...@apache.org>.
On 12/10/11 01:45, David Crossley wrote:
> The upcoming resolution [1] needs to define a
> "Description and scope" statement.
> 
> In the template [2] the statement used in two places.
> Here is the second:
> 
>   RESOLVED, that the Apache ${PROJECT} Project be and hereby is
>   responsible for the creation and maintenance of software
>   related to ${DESCRIPTION-AND-SCOPE};
>   and be it further
> 
> Probably should look at recent resolutions to ensure
> that template is current.
> 
> A suggestion:
>   related to comprehension and auditing of software distributions

+1

> We also need a concise description for use on the website,
> at Incubator podlings.xml metadata, reports, etcetera.
> 
>   The Apache Creadur (tm) Project provides a suite of tools for
>   the comprehension and auditing of software distributions.

+1

I've been wondering whether whether just using one plain HTML document
for the project website might work well. Opinions?

> Should we also have a concise description for each product, e.g.
> The Apache Creadur RAT (tm) software ...
> The Apache Creadur Whisker (tm) software ...

"Apache Rat" and "Apache Whisker" would also be fine. Since these names
are simple and are already established, I'm inclined to stick with them.

We'll need to ship a "Apache Creadur" bundle containing every product.

> I presume that we use a product's full name on the first mention,
> "Apache Creadur Whisker" and thereafter refer to it
> as "Apache Whisker" or just "Whisker". Is that correct?

+1

Robert

> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/graduation.html#tlp-resolution
> [2] https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/board/templates/podling-tlp-resolution.txt
> 
> -David
> 


Re: Description and Scope statement

Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-12-10, David Crossley wrote:

> The upcoming resolution [1] needs to define a
> "Description and scope" statement.

<snip/>

> A suggestion:
>   related to comprehension and auditing of software distributions

+1

> We also need a concise description for use on the website,
> at Incubator podlings.xml metadata, reports, etcetera.

>   The Apache Creadur (tm) Project provides a suite of tools for
>   the comprehension and auditing of software distributions.

Looks good to me.

Stefan