What about ActiveMQ-NG (New/Next Generation)? Regards Krzysztof
On 09.04.2015 02:39, Jim Gomes wrote: > I vote for ActiveMQ-RS. Four reasons: > > 1. RS stands for Research. > 2. RS is alphabetically sequential after Q, and it's fun to say. > 3. Seriously doubt it'll clash with a trademarked name. > 4. Fits with our other existing sub-project naming conventions > (ActiveMQ-NMS, ActiveMQ-CPP, etc.). > On Apr 8, 2015 3:06 PM, "Greg Stein" <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 05:34:37PM -0400, Daniel Kulp wrote: >>> ... >>> That said, since what we are talking about is a code name and not a >>> name of a *Project* SHOULD be easier (but again, we'll verify with >>> trademarks@ when we've decided on name). The name should always >>> be referred to as "Apache ActiveMQ-BLAH" and never "Apache BLAH" or >>> just "BLAH". The exception would be the normal dev chatter on our >>> dev list. This is just like the Apache ActiveMQ-NMS and Apache >>> ActiveMQ-CMS we have now. >> Right. Since "ActiveMQ" will be in its release name, you've already >> got your trademark bits handled, and avoided conflict with anything >> else. Find a codename and move along. trademarks@ isn't really needed >> as long as it remains a sub-name of ActiveMQ. Chris is just reacting >> strongly because of the past use of HornetQ, which is RH's mark. That >> is past, so we can skip worrying about that. >> >> I look forward to your choices, and the Board report in a couple weeks. >> >> Cheers, >> -g >> -- Krzysztof Sobkowiak JEE & OSS Architect Apache Software Foundation Member Apache ServiceMix <http://servicemix.apache.org/> Committer & PMC chair Senior Solution Architect @ Capgemini SSC <http://www.pl.capgemini-sdm.com/en/>
