On 3 Sep 06, at 10:37 PM 3 Sep 06, Dan Diephouse wrote:
Now I am all for considering another name. And the Foam variations
don't actually sound that bad.
But, I think this vote is silly with out a concrete name that
someone is proposing. While you can all agree that I and various
other folks made the wrong decision, I'm not going to vote +1
unless we're voting on a specific name. I asked all the XFire
committers for advice, talked to many people at IONA, and in
general spent a long time on phone calls and in meetings about the
name, and we have what we have. If someone wants to propose a
better name that we feel will be better for the project in the long
run, great. However if someone is going to propose something please
check into trademark issues first so we know whether or not its
worth voting on.
An advantage of CeltiXfire which hasn't been mentioned is that
CeltiXfire might work better from a marketing perspective. XFire
users and people who know about XFire can draw the connection
between the two projects. Same goes for the Celtix side of things.
We could eventually phase out CeltiXfire too and just call it CXF
which I think is more palatable
So consider this a -1 unless we are voting on a specific proposal.
I am only going to make the point that the choice of name has never
appeared to me to be settled, or has been driven from the wrong place
for the wrong reasons.
I will retract the proposal and I also won't vote as I'm not actually
a developer and haven't contributed anything to the project per se.
The only stipulation I would like to put in place is that you need to
decide on a name before the first milestone goes out because after
that you can't realistically change it without causing a great deal
of confusion.
- Dan
Hani Suleiman wrote:
How about a variant of foam? xfoam? foamix? I think we can round
up a good list of name candidates between us and pick one that
most are happy with.
While celtixfire is the most politically correct name, and most
'accurate', it's an awful name from every other perspective. Our
package names won't match, it's not easy to type or say, and is
prone to various awkward abbreviations (as someone else has
pointed out). If the project is a success (and we all think it
will be) then the name will become more and more meaningless as
time goes on.
It's not hard to imagine a future where it's taken off and has
enough momentum and reach as its own thing that people won't know/
care about the name origins, and instead will just wonder why
such a great project has such a silly name ;)
On Sep 3, 2006, at 8:56 PM, Bozhong Lin wrote:
I have been following up the project name proposal thread and I
did not see any good name without trademark problem. I envision
this will continue to be that way. We have already started
project with CeltiXfire and why do we bother our energy to
change it now? Users probably only care when we will have our
first milestone, instead of project name. So I suggest we focus
on getting our first milestone out ASAP instead of a pretty
project name, hence my
-1 to change name.
Cheers,
Bo
Jason van Zyl wrote:
Hi,
All the source is is, most of the other resources for the
project are setup, and so I thought I would revisit the issue
of the name as it seemed generally undecided that last time we
chatted about it. So if there is to be any discussion about a
name I guess we first need to decide whether we want to change
the name. If that vote goes through then we can talk about name.
Myself I'm
+1
To changing the name.
Jason van Zyl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Dan Diephouse
(616) 971-2053
Envoi Solutions LLC
http://netzooid.com
Jason van Zyl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
