Change name to (if we have to)?

[ralphtheninja]

We've been asked by Google to change the name of the organisation, all repositories and also all packages on npm. This is by no means a small feat, but we will do our best to comply.

Before we do this we need a discussion around names.

A common strategy is to try and come up with some synonyms to level but maybe there are other names that are more fitting. Any suggestions?

cc @Level/core

Ps @heapwolf has been helpful in removing leveldb.org (the repository for the old website has now been renamed to https://github.com/Level/leveljs.org).

[vweevers]

Before Google's request, the thought of renaming crossed my mind as part of the #58 effort. I dismissed that thought then because the pain of renaming wasn't justified. It was along the lines of:

• abstract-leveldown: @abstract-db/abstract-db
• levelup: gone (long term)
• leveldown: @abstract-db/leveldb
• level.js: @abstract-db/idb
• memdown: @abstract-db/mem
• encoding-down: @abstract-db/encode

[ralphtheninja]

One approach I was thinking about was to emphasize that this is a modular ecosystem instead of trying to come up with synonyms to level. E.g. something like:

https://github.com/moduledb

[ralphtheninja]

@mafintosh brought up on irc that something touching on key/value store could also be a good naming scheme. It's a concept that most devs are familiar with and is a good approach.

[ralphtheninja]

Jotting down some more ideas:

• @vweevers noticed that https://github.com/kvjs is free
• @chjj brought up someone donating a cool name, e.g. @dominictarr has the module kv which hasn't been maintained since 2013 (assuming Dominic would agree of course)

[vweevers]

And some more:

Considering that we plan to refactor out levelup, which is a big change for the ecosystem and how packages relate to each other, this is a good time (and the only time!) to rethink the names and move away from the *up vs *down naming scheme. We could do:

• kv-abstract (abstract-leveldown)
• kv-leveldb (leveldown), kv-mem (memdown), kv-indexed-db (level.js), etc
• kv (would re-export one of the former based on the runtime environment)

NB: This would delay the rename. However, doing a rename twice (now and when we finish #58) is not an option. As @ralphtheninja summarized on IRC: we are willing to work on this but we need time to do it.

[mcollina]

Is Google demand mentioning level or is it solely referred to leveldb? Would you mind sharing that letter?

I see the reasoning for the domain name. I’m not sure about the name “level” and “leveljs”.

moduledb is really nice 👍

[No9]

Would also like to see the letter pls

[ralphtheninja]

@No9 I can forward it to you. But need an email address :)

[vweevers]

Letter shared in @Level/core

[rvagg]

You guys are jumping far too quick too fast. Giving in to bullies is always a bad strategy and the letter is clearly a thinly veiled bully letter, typical lawyer activity to intimidate into action.

@mikeal pointed out that the USPTO doesn't show a mark for leveldb. It'd also be an amazing stretch to claim "level" and getting us to give it up without a fight might just clear the way for them to make a broad claim.

There's also the awkward fact that Google wants to be seen as a good actor in the node ecosystem. If they're going to go hard on this then it's going to cost them some brownie points because of the prominent place level* has in the Node world. I'm fine with imposing such a cost if they want to pay this game.

Basically: slow down please, there's no good reason for hasty action and it'll likely lead to sub-optimal outcomes. And, screw bullies.

[mikeal]

I’ll second Rod’s comment. Having read the email from Google, they don’t actually say outright that they have a trademark or any legal claim, they are just implying it by noting that they handle trademark related matters for Google.

Changing the name would be incredibly disruptive to the ecosystem. Several people we know at Google have been pinged about this, let’s give them some time to potentially resolve this and if for some reason they can’t and people are still concerned about potential actions there are many alternatives to explore before changing the name which is very disruptive to everyone who has built on and depends on this ecosystem.

[ralphtheninja]

You guys are jumping far too quick too fast. Giving in to bullies is always a bad strategy and the letter is clearly a thinly veiled bully letter, typical lawyer activity to intimidate into action.

There has been communication with google developers as well in private. They say we should comply, so it isn't just a bully email.

Basically: slow down please, there's no good reason for hasty action and it'll likely lead to sub-optimal outcomes. And, screw bullies.

Yep!