commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Craig R. McClanahan" <craig...@apache.org>
Subject RE: [jdbc] JdbcUtil etc
Date Fri, 08 Nov 2002 23:30:09 GMT


On Fri, 8 Nov 2002, Henri Yandell wrote:

> Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 18:05:08 -0500 (EST)
> From: Henri Yandell <bayard@generationjava.com>
> Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Subject: RE: [jdbc] JdbcUtil etc
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 8 Nov 2002 scolebourne@btopenworld.com wrote:
> > >
> > > For beans, the solution was to call it beanutil, so perhaps we should
> > > call it jdbcutil.
> > >
> >
> > Looking at the Sun website, the JDBC acronym is clearly trademarked on its
> > webpage so we need another name.
> >
> > I'll ask the question on General as do we even know if jdbcutil is ok?
> > [Beans isn't trademarked, JavaBeans is].
>
> Looking at it, and thinking in the usual stop-start way, we have a
> jdbc2pool project, so assuming that is okay, then jdbcutils is okay [to
> match beanutils].
>

I think we'd actually be better off if we didn't include "jdbc" in the
name of anything (including the existing jdbc2pool project) because of the
trademark.  There is precedent for this -- what is now Cactus was
originally called "J2EEUnit" and this raised issues.

> Hen

Craig


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message