On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > from: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Lets just take a step back and say > > is Commons a confusing name for a top level project? > > > > my answer: yes. > > > > Then maybe lets just call a vote on whether to rename it. This is > > somewhat challanged by the lack of actual committers to the > > project... I trust that if a step back is taken and only the above > > issue considered, that the PMC members of this project will do the right > > thing. > > It seems to be a little difficult to think of a one word name for 'a > language agnostic repository for common and shared libraries, tools > and other utility code that doesn't fit into another part of the > structure'. Ironically, commons is quite a good name because of its > blandness. How about 'dll' :) Or 'the shared registry'. I'm sure MS have a good name here. Tbh, I think the name Commons is good. It just has the problems I mentioned in a previou email, either it siblings with J-C or ends up as a new front. Halfway measures will just confuse people. [The meme of: Jakarta-Commons has been promoted to a top level project of Apache-Commons, given overview of all Apache languages and had a cross-slice of language group people set as its PMC works pretty well] > Notably, the j-c charter suggests j-c subsubprojects should have dull > and boring functional names, thus [collections], [io] and [lang]. > > ( I should probably go back and re-read the a-c board resolution at > this point, but I don't have a great email client to hand ;-) I'm sure > it has a good definition of a-c from which a name could be derived, > doesn't it???? ) > > Stephen > (now getting really fed up with reply to not working...) Is now yeah? I wasn't caring until I discovered that some people have auto-replies that mention how they can't answer right now as they're very busy etc. That was beginning to irritate :)
