From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9D6B201A9 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:31:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752634AbdBUWbR (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:31:17 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:59510 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751334AbdBUWbQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:31:16 -0500 Received: (qmail 5748 invoked by uid 109); 21 Feb 2017 22:31:15 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:31:15 +0000 Received: (qmail 16226 invoked by uid 111); 21 Feb 2017 22:31:18 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:31:18 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:31:13 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 17:31:13 -0500 From: Jeff King To: "G. Sylvie Davies" Cc: Git Users Subject: Re: Git trademark status and policy Message-ID: <20170221223113.ibtnngj3dwbtovs7@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170202022655.2jwvudhvo4hmueaw@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 07:55:15AM -0800, G. Sylvie Davies wrote: > Is "Gitter" allowed? (https://gitter.im/). > > More info here: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gitter > > Also, their twitter handle is @gitchat. > > Not sure I'd even classify "gitter" as a portmanteau. I don't think the Git committee has discussed that one. I'll mention it there. I wouldn't get hung up on the "is it a strict portmanteau" question. I think the more important question is whether it creates confusion about endorsement or interoperability. The portmanteau thing is more of a rule of thumb there. (That's all IMHO, of course, and not an official statement of the committee). -Peff