On 20-Apr-05, at 5:38 PM, Radu Bogdan Rusu wrote:
> Not really off-topic, but this raises another question for me: what's
> correct name of the project? I personally use "Player/Stage" on my web
> and projects, but I'd personally go for "Player/Stage/Gazebo" or
> "P/S/G" from
> now on.
That's been something we've just let slide so far, so it'd be best to
have a chat about it now.
The easy part:
When using Player with one of our simulators, you're using either
Player/Stage or Player/Gazebo. Both Stage and Gazebo are usable without
Player, too, in which case you drop the "Player/" prefix and just call
them Stage and Gazebo. (side note: I had a discussion today with Oliver
Michel of Cyberbotics on the possibilities of putting Player hooks in
Webots, his excellent commercial robot simulation. If you're
interested in a Player/Webots system, speak up).
The harder part:
I think Player/Stage/Gazebo is not a good project or team name, though
I sometimes use it when I need to make sure that Gazebo gets full
recognition. Most often though, I refer to the Player/Stage Project -
the name we had before Gazebo was born. We obviously don't want to keep
appending the names of any future major bits of software on the end of
the name, and I really don't like the triple-name, so in order to avoid
any second-class implications to Gazebo (which I certainly don't
intend), I would prefer to just drop the 'Stage' by default. . That
leaves the "Player Project", which is OK. I'd like to hear other
people's opinions, particularly the BDFLs that are identified with the
> I was also thinking about designing some logos with P/S/G to put on my
> pages, since I couldn't find a collection of them on the current
> playerstage@... pages. Do we have any btw?
We just have the Elsie and Elmer image, which is not our copyright and
therefore not cool. I'm open to suggestions/contributions for logos.
The web page is well overdue for a visual update.
> One idea would be to "force" 3rd parties to use the logos on all their
> publications/materials and also to clearly state that P/S/G is GPL
> educational/academic (?) work.
We don't insist on educational/academic. We just use the good ol'
GPLv2, with a little LGPL for the client libs. I believe the GPL has
the best available combination of freedoms and restrictions.
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:51:50PM +0200, Richard Vaughan wrote:
>> I just had a long chat with Matthew LaFary, Director of Software at
>> MobileRobots (the re-branded ActivMedia). I'm cc'ing him on this mail.
>> MobileRobots have started to mention Player/Stage in their marketing
>> materials, because of a Player wrapper for ARIA that gives them access
>> to Player/Stage. Presumably, they actually mean Player, so they'll be
>> able to do Player/Gazebo too. This is largely the work of our good
>> friend and colleague Reed Hedges, and definitely a Good Thing. It will
>> allow MobileRobots' customers the ability to use the software bundled
>> with the robot together with P/S/G code, rather than having to choose
>> one or the other.
>> Still, it raises two points that we (the developers) need to consider:
>> 1) Player, Stage, Gazebo and their combinations are our trademarks.
>> like to retain control of the trademarks so we can prevent them being
>> used for evil. The MobileRobots stuff is not evil at all, but we have
>> to actively protect the trademark or we default to losing control of
>> 2) The exact wording of the P/S stuff in the marketing blurb is
>> slightly wrong (I'm certain that this is marketdroid tweaking, and not
>> Reed's choice). They say "Player-Stage" when it should be
>> "Player/Stage" and they probably actually mean "Player". We should
>> them get the terminology right, or we'll have to spend time
>> their customers when they get their gear home and start playing with
>> it. One small concern for me is that the ARIA/Player bridge is called
>> "MobileSim": this might suggest to people that they are getting their
>> simulator from the company rather than the Player/Stage Project.
>> So where I think this takes us is:
>> We need to establish a policy for people to use our trademarks. So we
>> have to state very clearly what the trademarks are and what credits
>> any) need to be given when the marks are used. Currently the
>> MobileRobots literature gives no credit or URL: I think a either or
>> both of these would be appropriate in third-party marketing material.
>> I'm too pooped to draft a policy right now, but I wanted to get the
>> issue down in writing.
>> If Reed is reading, and can fill us in on the details of "MobileSim"
>> without breaking confidences, I'm sure people would be interested.
>> Richard Vaughan
>> School of Computing Science / Simon Fraser University
> Yours sincerely,
> Radu Bogdan Rusu
> | Radu Bogdan 'veedee' Rusu | http://www.rbrusu.com
> | Javaclient for P/S/G | http://java-player.sf.net
> | The optimist sees a task in every problem.
> | The pessimist sees a problem in every task.
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: New Crystal Reports XI.
> Version 11 adds new functionality designed to reduce time involved in
> creating, integrating, and deploying reporting solutions. Free runtime
> new features, or free trial, at:
> Playerstage-developers mailing list
School of Computing Science / Simon Fraser University