Page History

This guide was generated from real discussion threads on the Apache Incubator mailing list and reflects actual governance, branding, and trademark issues encountered by projects.

Who This Guide Is For

This guide is intended for:

...

It is designed to support practical decision-making at proposal time, during incubation, and when preparing a graduation recommendation.

Unifying Principle

Branding at the ASF exists to ensure that the public can clearly distinguish which software is produced by an Apache Project and which is not.

...

Purpose

This guide explains how to handle branding, naming, trademark ownership, attribution, and project identity throughout the full lifecycle of an Apache podling.

...

This guide focuses on what must be done, when, and why, based entirely on real Incubator experience. Guidance in this document complements, but does not replace the ASF Trademark Policy

...

1. Trademark Ownership Must Be Established Before Entry

When a project proposes entry into the ASF, it must demonstrate:

...

• The company intends to retain trademark rights
• The ASF must evaluate whether the new podling name is sufficiently distinct
• The proposal needs an unambiguous disclosure of:
  • Registered marks
  • Regional variations
  • Ongoing company use

...

2. Naming Conflicts Require Early Resolution

When a company holds a trademark related to a proposed project, the ASF must ensure that the submitted name:

...

• A required rename before incubation
• Documentation of:
  • The old name
  • The new name
  • The reason for the change

...

3. Clear Disclosure of Corporate Relationships

When a project originates inside a company, the proposal must clearly disclose:

...

• Support transparent governance
• Avoid later confusion between ASF-hosted and vendor-hosted variants
• Prevent neutrality issues during incubation

...

4. Renaming as a Tool for Neutrality

A rename is not a penalty. It is an essential governance tool when needed.

...

The pre-acceptance period is the ideal time to rename.

...

5. Avoiding Naming Collisions with Vendor Ecosystems

A name can be unsuitable even without trademark conflict.

...

Perception matters. A legally available name can still be unsuitable.

...

6. Non-Legal Naming Risks and Cultural Sensitivity

A project name may be unsuitable due to:

...

Mentors and PPMCs should include cultural considerations in naming discussions.

...

7. Evaluation Criteria for Proposal-Time Naming

• Does the name resemble a commercial product or brand family?
• Might users assume vendor ownership?
• Does the name imply association with a proprietary platform?
• Is the name widely used in package ecosystems or cloud platforms?
• Could the name be culturally insensitive or exclusionary?

If any apply, a rename is usually required.

...

8. How Podlings Typically Correct Naming Issues

Effective corrections include:

• Selecting a name that:

  • It is not part of a commercial ecosystem
  • Does not resemble vendor naming patterns
  • It is distinctive and unambiguously community-owned

• Clearly documenting:

  • Old name
  • New name
  • Reason for renaming

• Updating:

  • Websites
  • Repositories
  • Proposal materials
  • Ecosystem documentation

...

9. Use of the ASF Name Search Process

The ASF name search should be used when:

...

It provides documented assurance to mentors and the IPMC.

...

10. Graduation-Time Branding and Domain Stewardship

As graduation approaches, the PPMC becomes the long-term steward of project identity.

...

Branding decisions areled by the PPMC, with oversight appropriate to the podling's governance state. ASF Legal, the IPMC, and corporate contributors advise, but do not control naming decisions. Corporate marketing preferences do not override PPMC authority.

...

11. Common Branding Failures Seen at Graduation

Typical issues include:

• Use of the project name without the word “Apache” in prominent locations
• Missing or incorrect trademark notices
• Vendor-controlled domains redirecting to ASF infrastructure
• Downstream packages or documentation omitting Apache attribution

...

12. Graduation as a Correction Gate

Graduation is the last realistic point to:

...

Allowing branding gaps to persist introduces long-term risk.

...

13. How Branding Issues Are Corrected in Practice

Effective PPMCs:

• Fix ASF branding immediately across podling-controlled infrastructure
• Request corrections from downstream ecosystem consumers
• Reduce reliance on third-party or vendor domains

Graduation should only be recommended after core branding issues are resolved.

...

14. Post-Graduation

...

Incubation Prefix Removal

During incubation, podlings often use markers such as:

...

• All incubation indicators must be removed

...

15. Risks of Delayed Prefix Removal

Delayed cleanup can:

• Signal immaturity to users
• Slow adoption
• Causes incorrect classification in downstream ecosystems

...

16. PPMC Responsibility for Identity Normalisation

PPMCs are responsible for coordinating:

...

This work establishes a stable project identity and should not be deferred. Projects rarely arrive with fully compliant branding. Mentors should expect iterative correction, not perfection on day one.

...

17. Key Takeaways for Mentors, PPMCs, and the IPMC

• Trademark clarity is required before entry
• Legal clearance alone is not sufficient
• Names must avoid vendor association, ecosystem confusion, and cultural insensitivity
• Renaming before incubation is normal and healthy
• Graduation should not be recommended until branding is correct
• Attribution and domain control are essential
• Incubation status must not persist in public identity after graduation
• Branding stewardship belongs to the PPMC, with IPMC oversight