On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Dave butlerdi wrote:

Was quite suprised to see CouchDB Ltd on the slides from the Hadoop meeting
in Berlin. Was unable to get up there but really think that this is a bad

I work for a company *very *unfriendly to (rather, more unfamiliar with)
open-source. Having commercial entities behind specific software projects
lends them a legitimacy to many people. If you're arguing that CouchDB Ltd.
may be an endorsement or misleading name, that's one thing, but I fail to
see the poor taste behind announcing any and all commercial endeavors behind

You are an Apache project and this just seems counter productive. I also
think that several other projects have become entailed of this type of
behaviour and had problems with Apache in the end.

Can you give an example? As an IP geek I'm always interested in reading
about how these kinds of things go wrong.

I do not commit, not am I interested in commercialising my experience with
the product, but use Couch. However, to use the project name for
gain by a few does seem wrong. Why not follow the Ruby/Rails example and
up a community effort for the provision of services under the CouchDB name.

Can you expound on what you mean by that? I'm unfamiliar with the rails
community -- what does a "community effort for the provision of services"
look like?

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions



site design / logo © 2015 Grokbase