Open Stack

On Fri, 2014-09-12 at 09:38 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> The point I have been trying to make is that because our community
> creates code and not standards, we should not simply trademark an API
> without including the implementation.

To make sure the basic point isn't getting lost - we're talking about
the requirements for products and clouds that wish to use the "OpenStack
Powered" trademark. We're not "trademarking an API".

We want there to be a vibrant commercial ecosystem of "OpenStack
Powered" products and clouds. But we also want to ensure that such
products offer an experience which reflects well on our brand and
encourages healthy engagement with our community.

i.e. at least three things to balance - growing this commercial
ecosystem, making sure the brand isn't damaged and growing our
community.

If the implementation of a capability offers users a good experience and
the vendor is engaged with our community in good faith, then I'd err on
the side of allowing the use of the trademark since they will grow the
commercial ecosystem.

I don't like to see us making rigid rules like "required capabilities
must have some designated sections", because such rules are so far
removed from the nuanced non-technical considerations we should be
making about trademark usage.

[Snip the rest, because it all leads from your initial assertion]

Mark.