Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title choices I've offered myself here.
Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times? Karl On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <daddy...@gmail.com> wrote: > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following ways: > > Abbreviation: "MCF" > Short name: "ManifoldCF" > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF" > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold > Connectors Framework" > > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in > Action". > > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be used? > > Karl > > > > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky > <jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com> wrote: >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually use it >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go along >> with the majority. >> >> -- Jack Krupansky >> >> -------------------------------------------------- >> From: "Karl Wright" <daddy...@gmail.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM >> To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF >> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from >>> me. >>> >>> Karl >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name. >>>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates >>>>> selection rule #5: >>>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables >>>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.) >>>>> >>>>> That's five syllables. >>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name - >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes). >>>> >>>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit >>>>> of rule #1: >>>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word >>>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing. >>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore. >>>> This is no argument. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19 >>>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements. >>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on... >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------- >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <daddy...@gmail.com> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM >>>>> To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF >>>>> >>>>>> Jack, >>>>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use. >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a >>>>>> good choice. >>>>>> >>>>>> Karl >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky >>>>>> <jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really >>>>>>> re-vote for >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <markrmil...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM >>>>>>> To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF. >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to >>>>>>>>> retain >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However, >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote >>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >
