This is valuable feedback, and I am not quite sure how to deal with this after the vote has already passed.
I took a look at retwill, and it seems that it has not had any activity (wiki edits, issues, pull requests, releases, commits) for about 18 months. In fact, it appears that it was abandoned in May 2012, only two months after it was created in March of the same year. What is the general feeling on this list? Is it a strong enough conflict to require a different project name? Thanks -Andreas. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Olemis Lang <ole...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Andreas Neumann <a...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Andrea, > > thanks for the link, we did see that project but thought that it is not > > relevant because it has not had any activity for 6 years, so it is > probably > > dead. > > Should we be more concerned about this? > > > > There is a continuation (fork) named retwill [1]_ . BTW twill is a > dependency to run the test suite of Apache™ Bloodhound . > > IMO , I do not think twill is a suitable name . It's very spread and > popular in some circle . Choosing that name might cause some confusion . > > .. [1] https://bitbucket.org/brandizzi/retwill > > .. [2] http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596527808.do > > [...] > > -- > Regards, > > Olemis - @olemislc > > Apache™ Bloodhound contributor > http://issues.apache.org/bloodhound > http://blood-hound.net > > Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ > Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ > > Featured article: >
