Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Naming convention guidance for new projects #1514

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

dims
Copy link
Member

@dims dims commented Jan 6, 2025

We have an incoming request from Kubernetes Steering about names for new incoming projects:
https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/8726

If this PR has consensus and is merged, then follow ups would be:

  • Request k8s steering to publish their naming guidelines in a well publicized location (or linked from a well somewhere easily findable)
  • Check if other popular projects want to do the same? (otel? envoy?)
  • May be even have a central location that point to all the individual project naming conventions
  • If a project has its own donation process for sub-projects, they should be linked from the project specific naming guidelines as well.

NOTE: This is not a retro-active policy, we don't go back to revisit projects that already use popular prefixes to change them, this is meant to be forward looking guidance for projects that will be processed by TOC once this merges.

@dims
Copy link
Member Author

dims commented Jan 6, 2025

Note sent to k8s steering inhttps://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/8738

@@ -23,6 +23,10 @@ Projects may enter the CNCF either by applying as a sandbox project or applying

Evaluting projects against the criteria does take some time and the TOC has recently modified the Due Diligence process to reduce duplication of work, streamline handoffs, and provide better transparency to the project and its adopters about its conformance and implementation of the criteria.

## Naming conventions for projects

All CNCF projects are subject to the [Trademark Usage Policies](https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/trademark-usage) set by Linux Foundation. Specifically, new or incoming projects should avoid use existing trademarks in their proposed project names. In addition, if they are intending to use a popular prefix/suffix of an existing project (like "kube" or "k8s"), then they should consult the leadership group of the respective project to seek their approval and document the consensus reached. Existing projects are encouraged to document their naming guidelines to make this process smooth as well to avoid lengthy deliberation process for new project names.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

AFAIK, k8s is a tademark of kubernetes so should be avoided.

I think we should ask new/incoming projects to follow existing project's naming guideline and not use the reserved prefix/suffix based on the guideline if the project has a naming guideline. Consult the project leadership could be perceived as subjective as some project could be mostly owned by a single company.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

s/existing trademarks/[existing rademarks](see https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/trademarks)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@linsun k8s and kube is not trademarked. We have to cover the cases where the naming doc is not yet created by the leadership (Steering, TC or equivalent), so we have to cover that as well. I fully expect k8s steering folks to draft something soon, we just have to work with other projects to do theirs.

We should not be trying to deal with single company here. there are other mechanisms in our arsenal to deal with that i think.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FYI, on the last TOC call of December we did confirm that "K8s®" is in the list of trademarks on https://www.linuxfoundation.org/legal/trademarks. The assumption was that it was not. "Kube" alone is not trademarked according to the list.

Copy link
Member Author

@dims dims Jan 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@krook ah thanks for confirming! my bad @krook @linsun

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Consult the project leadership could be perceived as subjective as some project could be mostly owned by a single company.

We should not be trying to deal with single company here. there are other mechanisms in our arsenal to deal with that i think.

+1, IMHO single-company-owned projects is something that needs addressing regardless and shouldn't be in scope here.

(FWIW in this particular example, that's not the case, as we have maximum representation rules limiting to 2/7 of the committee ... I think those rules have worked well if only to at least limit perception of excessive individual company influence.)

@dims is there anywhere tracking that topic currently?

I fully expect k8s steering folks to draft something soon, we just have to work with other projects to do theirs.

Yes, people are still filtering back from holiday vacations but I expect a draft soon. We meet tomorrow.

@dims
Copy link
Member Author

dims commented Jan 6, 2025

xref: for those who are not yet aware, the trigger for this discussion/policy was #1484

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: New
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants