Subject: Does alpine violate rust's trademark?

From: Wolf <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 18:46:37 +0200

Hello,

I would like to inquire about the `community/rust' package. After
reading this [0] fun debate bug thread over at debian bug tracker, I've
started to wonder what is the state of this in alpine.

It looks like at least some of the patches in community/rust do not fall
under any of these categories (from [1]):

 - porting the software to a different architecture
 - fixing local paths
 - adding patches that have been released upstream
 - adding patches that have been reported upstream, provided that the
   patch is removed if it is not accepted upstream

That seems to mean that distributing this package under the name `rust'
is not really legal.

Was any evaluation of if the trademark is being broken done? Do we want
to rename `rust' to `totally-not-rust' or something? Do we want to do
nothing and pretend the problem does not exist?

IANAL, so I've decided to ask here assuming someone else knows more
about this.

W.

0: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1013920
1: https://foundation.rust-lang.org/policies/logo-policy-and-media-guide/

-- 
There are only two hard things in Computer Science:
cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.

---

From: Max Rees <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 11:15:33 -0400

>    patch is removed if it is not accepted upstream

Might you cite which patches do not follow these categories rather than keeping us in suspense or requiring us to duplicate your research?

Max

---

From: "alice" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 18:20:02 +0200

> nothing and pretend the problem does not exist?
as the foundation says themselves[0], you should ask them, not alpine.

>> Please do not approach users of the trademarks with a complaint. That
>> should be left to the Rust Foundation and its representatives. Thanks!

[0]: https://foundation.rust-lang.org/policies/logo-policy-and-media-guide/#helping-out

---

From: Ariadne Conill <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 10:41:18 -0500 (CDT)

Hi,

> nothing and pretend the problem does not exist?

The Rust patches are necessary to make Rust behave as expected on the 
Alpine system, the Rust developers are aware of them, some of them 
have already been upstreamed over the years, while others are planned to 
eventually be replaced with equivalent upstream work that aligns the 
`-musl` targets, but somebody needs to actually implement the work to 
harmonize the targets, which again, everyone including upstream Rust 
wants[0].

Needless to say, the Rust developers are aware of them and have raised no 
objection to the patches as they are necessary to make things work as 
expected on Alpine.

Ariadne

[0]: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/422

---

From: Wolf <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 01:44:52 +0200

On 2022-07-20 10:41:18 -0500, Ariadne Conill wrote:
> The Rust patches are necessary to make Rust behave as expected on the Alpine
> system, the Rust developers are aware of them, some of them have already
> been upstreamed over the years, while others are planned to eventually be
> replaced with equivalent upstream work that aligns the `-musl` targets, but
> somebody needs to actually implement the work to harmonize the targets,
> which again, everyone including upstream Rust wants[0].
> 

Thank you for the answers and sorry about bringing this up. It is
obvious I was mistaken.

W.

---

From: Kevin Daudt <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 16:18:46 +0000

> should be left to the Rust Foundation and its representatives. Thanks!

So these kinds of questions go against the wishes fo the Rust
foundation.