[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Rust trademark policy

From: Bone Baboon
Subject: Re: Rust trademark policy
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 20:14:38 -0400

Adonay Felipe Nogueira via writes:

> Em 19-06-2021 00:25, Bone Baboon escreveu:
>> The summary is located at
>> <>.
>> The Git repository for the summary that can be cloned is at
>> <>.
> Thank you for the notes, I'm Cc'ing David Hedlund which is a member of
> the FSD's Free software evaluation Project Team ([1]). I know that they
> might already be subscribed to this list, but the Cc should put a copy
> of the message directly on their "Important" inbox (or similar).
> Perhaps you (Bone Baboon) can also join the aforementioned project team,
> now that I have left the group, they might be in need of a new contributor.

I looked at
Where can I learn more about the FSD's Free software evaluation project

> Besides this, when I used to be a reviewer for the FSD, I remember that
> some things caught by grep searches can be false-positives. In this
> case, I leave a little hint: to evaluate the triviality of "changing a
> name" in order to address the section of the FSDG on trademarks ([2]),
> the `wc` program might not be a good tool for the job, consider instead
> using a text editor/pager/viewer to see the results and checking if
> there is any variable assignment that makes things easier to the
> supposedly-rebranded fork.
> For example, if one file defines "RUST_COMPILER_PROJECT_NAME=rustc" and
> later that file is included/called by others so that they can later use
> RUST_COMPILER_PROJECT_NAME, then the direct `grep` pipe to `wc` will
> catch all those. I'm not well versed on all of this, but I have seen
> some other projects use these assignments mostly with macro languages or
> definitions such as those in M4, Autotools, and Autoconf which, in turn,
> can get carried over by Automake, libtool, Make, pkg-config, C
> preprocessor (which expands the so called “C macros”), C compiler and so on.
> If you do find false-positives, write an extra `grep`/`sed`/`awk` pass
> so that these are removed from the result using basic or extended
> regular expressions (`-E` option for `grep`/`sed`, only expression type
> for `awk`, `nano` and `less`, while `ed` only supports the basic one).
> All in all, always document stuff, preferably in the right and prominent
> place, so that the work doesn't get lost in the conversation and that
> other people don't end up redoing it.

Thanks for this feedback.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]