One logistical item to point out. We have been advised to minimize our use of “OIF” to reduce confusion with another organization that has a trademark on “OIF”. While we won’t be able to prevent everyone from using the acronym to reference the foundation, much like OSF was used, we have been advised to not use it in “attention getting” places.

We have started to replace the acronym with “OpenInfra Foundation” and “OpenInfra” depending on the use case. Another option to consider that we’re using for twitter handle, url, and similar spots is “OpenInfraDev”. 

Thanks,

Wes

On Dec 15, 2020, at 10:50 AM, Amy Marrich <amy@demarco.com> wrote:

Kendall and Jeremy,

I'm good with the suggested name changes especially with that added information the openinfra isn't available. We should definitely keep it short so don't feel going to openinfratructure is a good alternative even if it is more obvious. I do think the more we use OIF vs OSF it'll be more natural for people to look for it.

Thanks,

Amy (spotz)

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 12:34 PM Jeremy Stanley <fungi@yuggoth.org> wrote:

On 2020-12-15 12:20:58 -0600 (-0600), Ryan Beisner wrote:
> My $0.02 over lunch:  I think #openinfra-* would be a fitting move
> with the same number of digits and a recognizable moniker.
[...]

The blocker there is that we can't control the #openinfra-*
namespace on Freenode because the #openinfra channel is already
taken by the separate https://opensourceinfra.org/ community.
--
Jeremy Stanley
_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation

_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation