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 20:07:25 GMT
> > 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.
> 
> That doesn't appear to be the consensus.

Yup, i am catching up the email :)

- Adi 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason van Zyl [mailto:jason@maven.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 3:06 PM
> To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Project name...
> 
> 
> 
> On 8 Aug 06, at 2:16 PM 8 Aug 06, Sakala, Adinarayana wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> It's not that hard to change the names associated with resources.  
> Basically up to the group to decide now.
> 
> > 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.
> 
> That doesn't appear to be the consensus.
> 
> > 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
> >>
> >
> 
> Jason van Zyl
> jason@maven.org
> 
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message