cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sakala, Adinarayana" <ASAK...@iona.com>
Subject RE: Project name...
Date Tue, 08 Aug 2006 18:16:52 GMT
Hi Dan,

> So, the question is:  do we have to change the name or is celtixfire 
> acceptable? (with the proposed package name being 
> org.apache.cxf)
I think CeltiXfire is acceptable and we probably should use org.apache.cxf as package name
as it will be consistent with the name and other resources that we are being setup.
Looking through the general incubator archives i didnt find anything that suggested us to
change the name.
So, i think we are good to go with the CeltiXfire name.
Probably we should check with Apache legal for sanity sake.

thanks,
Adi Sakala

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kulp, John Daniel 
> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 4:56 PM
> To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Project name...
> 
> 
> 
> When we made the CeltiXfire proposal, I know there was a lot 
> of feedback 
> regarding the name.   Some liked it, some hated it, there 
> were concerns of 
> trademarks, etc... 
> 
> I know everyone basically said the name issues could be 
> resolved during 
> incubating, but it would be nice to resolve it sooner.   
> We're going to have 
> to do a major package rename (org.objectweb/org.codehaus -> 
> org.apache) and 
> it would be nice to settle on the next at the same time to 
> minimize the 
> disruption.
> 
> So, the question is:  do we have to change the name or is celtixfire 
> acceptable? (with the proposed package name being 
> org.apache.cxf)   Can 
> someone make heads/tails of all the recent naming discussions 
> on the general 
> incubating list and figure out if we do or do not need to 
> change it?    
> Trying to follow all those discussions is making my head spin.
> 
> -- 
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer
> IONA
> P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194   F:781-902-8001
> daniel.kulp@iona.com
> 

Mime
View raw message