Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of e.semog@gmail.com designates
 209.85.216.46 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20150408220614.GA65015@gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAGZ-RD+5J7xQxjqPAkN-kCH6YaNrB_5DzX20-VASLXCGQ3Sdiw@mail.gmail.com>
	<D14AE411.247B4F%chris.mattmann@gmail.com>
	<3FA3E6F5-BE8D-43FA-A361-1E480B887C2D@apache.org>
	<20150408220614.GA65015@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 17:39:40 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAGeZ+bgvVDc_BabpDLbM_Pjha90oDhixP3LpqT3h4d33w23usw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Naming Suggestions?
From: Jim Gomes <e.semog@gmail.com>
To: ActiveMQ Dev <dev@activemq.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013c68561930a005133fe25c

--089e013c68561930a005133fe25c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

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" <gstein@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
>

--089e013c68561930a005133fe25c--