Pydantic Logfire

This smells a bit like someone is using the brand of a famous open-source tool they built to promote their startup. If so, that's lame; if the new business is unrelated to your open source project, branding it as Pydantic Logfire seems a bit disingenuous.

I think there's a less-misleading way to use open-source reputation for business credibility, though: "so-and-so business, by the creators of so-and-so project". Knowing that respected and skilled folks are working on a business is great! It's a fine distinction, but I think it matters.

If anyone is mislead about whether Pydantic is Logfire or visa-versa, I'll eat my hat.

Other than that, see my answer to the other comment.

For the record, I don't agree with the grandparent comment at all. None of this is "lame". It's a path to sustainable OSS and it's more obvious than ever that we need these pathways.

But to be fair, the branding here is a little weird. If you were living under a rock and hadn't heard of pydantic then the website reads like pydantic is the company and logfire is a product of said company. That's fine. But then you've also got a product called pydantic. Or is it now called pydantic pydantic? I realise it's kind of an extension to pydantic but the AI focus doesn't make it feel that way and so I think that's where the GP is coming from. Sorry to nitpick, I hope it does well.

I think that's fair. It's a hard problem.

We could have called the company a completely new name and everyone would have been confused, or just called us "pydantic".

I think Pydantic being the company name, and a standalone entity, and there being other products is fairly common. I think if Logfire is successful, it will end up just being known as "Logfire".