Hi, With the renaming effort planned to start right after the 'packaging' branch lands, I think it makes sense to discuss and vote on the naming of the product(s) of this project.
Buried in another thread Alex remarked the following, which I think is an excellent suggestion: "When we were discussing this earlier, we were discussing two IDE-friendly release artifacts, one designed for folks migrating from Apache Flex and another for folks not interested in SWF. In the packaging branch I have most of that working. We were discussing calling the migration package 'FlexJS' and the other one Royale or RoyaleJS. The latter is considered by some folks to mean "Royale for JS". The package names would be apache-royale-flexjs-<version> and maybe apache-royale-royalejs-<version>. The project name would definitely be Royale but I think we want to have artifacts that denote target markets." A strong case has been made to leave off the "JS" off all but the legacy/migration package, which makes sense to me as well. I think there are plans to have this project create multiple product (e.g. one that does AS3->WebAssembly), so I do not think that we should name the current product 'Royale'. It will be increasingly confusing to have a product with the same name as the project and then have other products from the same project with totally different names. I suggest we come up with a naming convention that will reflect the functionality of the various products and their link to the project. E.g. (off the top of my head, just to show what I mean): royale-as-js, royale-as-wasm, etc. What do you think? EdB -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
