On Wed, 5 Jun 2019 at 14:19, Robert Schweikert
But again it all comes back to my earlier question why do we pursue this avenue? Initially the answer was, paraphrasing, ability to better handle financial transactions and attract sponsors. As the discussion moves on it appears to me that the real reason is control of trademarks and more independence. If the later is really the underlying reason, then yes a name change would be the pill we have to swallow. But if we primarily care about being able to properly handle financial transactions then a name change is not needed and I am certain there are reasonable ways to deal with the trademark topics that come up.
Please do us all a favour and kill the conspiracy theory talk :) The primary motivator for the Foundation is to better handle financial transactions and to attract sponsors - period. The name of the Project, the name of the Foundation, are supplementary discussions that spawn from that, and the Trademark issues are not things to be ignored or brushed over lightly. The harsh realities of trademark law will shape and impact what the Project will be able to do as a Foundation. There's no ulterior motive in bringing this up for discussion now, but if we don't discuss it now, it will be too late to consider those implications once we've started signing contracts and forming legal entities. if we keep the name, we'll have the challenges of figuring out how to operate a legal entity without absolute control of our trademark. There are no easy answers on that route, but the challenges are not impossible. If we change the name, we'll have the challenges of rebranding. There are no easy answers on that route either, but the challenges are also not impossible. So, I think you can stop going back to your earlier question instead look forward. The only question for the Project is which is our preference? Regards, Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org