my 2 cents,
The name MUST change in the first place.
I can’t imagine how confusing it would be to call it the Elasticsearch fork. Going forward it is very likely to assume the functionality will diverse and that the code and modules will be structured differently. It is not realistic to assume any project / product from this fork will be compatible with future Elastic’s products (e.g. Kibana fork talking to future Elasticsearch from Elastic, Elastic’s Elasticsearch client talking to this Elasticsearch fork, … etc). If one of the main reasons behind forking is to enable inovations then sooner or later the interfaces will not be compatible (and that is not a bad thing!).
Going forward the name must change, including all opendistro plugins, forums, … etc. IMO this should happen before the very first fork repo is made public.
Second, the need of NEUTRAL governance.
As far as I can tell AWS is now the largest entity investing into forking. Do not get me wrong, anyone making public commitment to build and maintain large open source project and community deserves respect. However, I can imagine that it is natural for AWS to find a legitimate reasons to align some parts of this Elasticsearch fork with some of its cloud technologies / services, and although this is not a bad thing it could put “openess” and “transparency” into question.
I understand it can take time to build or join neutral governance but it is absolute critical goal, and as such this goal should be part of public plan with clearly defined milestones.
Lukáš (speaking for myself)