(Early → easier to set up repository, Later → marketing committee can be involved, see mailing list for discussion)
Approved Resolution 7 (TSC 08/08/2019):
To start, a proposal should come with a temporary "code name" (e.g. a geographical location) that can be used for the repository with low risk of trademark violation. On approval, the marketing committee will work with the proposers to create a long term name and will do all the necessary checks. The repository name can be changed.
3 Comments
Arnaud J Le Hors
Arnaud J Le Hors
Given that the issue was brought up by Brian/the LF team, I assume they did see some problems they are trying to mitigate. But in any case everyone who has spoken up so far seems to agree on Option 2. Unless I hear anybody disagree I think we can make that the proposed resolution.
Shawn Amundson
The preference should be to retain the name that the developers have given the project. Especially if it has existed in labs and the name is good, it would be beneficial to keep it.
The MC's role should be to vet and provide due diligence around proposed names. It would be best if the MC could weigh in on these topics prior to the proposal, because doing it post-acceptance does two things: a) provides pressure to come up with the name quickly (days, not months); and b) delays a lot of other HL activities that occur upon acceptance of the project (basically anything that requires the name, including repos, etc.). The MC should have a checklist of things that they look into (trademark violation, problems with the name in some languages, etc.).
Hart Montgomery
I like the text as is.
As Shawn points out, it would be best if communication with the MC started before the proposal was approved.
Dan Middleton
I've just requested review from the MC chair.