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.
Other than that, see my answer to the other comment.
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.
Google was originally just the search engine, without any qualifier. Now it's Google Search. In the same way, pydantic can become "Pydantic Validate" or something.
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".
I don’t see how anybody would have been confused in that scenario? People start new companies with new names all the time.
What you are actually doing is what is confusing. It’s a really weird branding choice to name an observability platform startup after a validation library.