Berin Loritsch wrote: > > So I take it you guys didn't like > > "Apache Component Architecture"?
+1 from outside the contributor group. Simple, clean, to the point. Leaves nothing to +"explain" > > I received no comment, so I don't know if you all saw it yet.... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Leo Sutic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 10:24 AM > > To: Avalon Developers List > > Subject: RE: [Vote] Logo & banding > > > > > > > > > > > From: Paul Hammant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > > Peter, Leo, Berin, > > > > > > >On Wed, 3 Apr 2002 00:34, Leo Simons wrote: > > > > > > > >>What about "Apache Application Architecture" > > > >>or "Common Application Architecture"? > > > >> > > > > > > > >I like > > > > > > > Me too, despite the recent service 'offences' against the component > > > name. > > > > > > Having said that CAA is already used with the same meaning in the > > > world > > > of IBM minicomputers. We should be careful to use Avalon Common > > > Application Architecture (ACAA). > > > > "Apache Common Architecture" ? Just trying to fit "Apache" in > > there without making it too long. > > > > /LS > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > <mailto:avalon-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For > > additional commands, > > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
