cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Little <>
Subject Re: [vote] Do we want to change the name
Date Tue, 05 Sep 2006 15:51:43 GMT

Surely the time could be spent on more productive efforts ;-)


On 5 Sep 2006, at 16:39, Johnson, Eric wrote:

> +0 to changing the name.
> While there is obviously a sizable number of people who dislike the
> name, there is also a number of people who do like it. I personally
> don't like the name much, but I don't hate it either. There are good
> reasons to keep it, unless a better name can be found.
> To date, the best proposal is using the shorthand CXF to refer to the
> project. This way we can keep the name, and have a palatable nickname.
> It never hurt WPI, RPI, or MIT to have two names....
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Sakala, Adinarayana
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 11:24 AM
>> To:
>> Subject: RE: [vote] Do we want to change the name
>> -1 to changing the name.
>> Personally i dont see changing the name is required and i dont
> understand
>> why we are voting on this.
>> As it was stated before, lot of effort and thought process has gone
> into
>> this and without a concrete option it is hard to vote.
>> I agree with Dan Diephouse that there is some amount of marketing
> benefit
>> as well to keep the name CeltiXfire.
>> thanks,
>> Adi Sakala
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Debbie Moynihan []
>>> Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 8:40 PM
>>> To:
>>> Subject: Re: [vote] Do we want to change the name
>>> Well I believe that if you don't like a name then at least a
>>> better one
>>> should be proposed.  While some suggestions have been
>>> interesting, I haven't
>>> seen any suggestions so far that are super compelling.  I
>>> have been reading
>>> them all and was curious to see if someone would come up with a
> better
>>> name.  I thought Foam was an interesting concept for example,
>>> although I
>>> believe that one had some trademark issues.  I didn't personally
> have
>>> anything to do with selecting the "Celtix" or "XFire" names for
> either
>>> project and the idea of picking a new name was somewhat
>>> attractive when I
>>> was working on the proposal for merging these projects and
>>> moving the code
>>> to Apache.  Then we brainstormed and ran into a lot of
>>> difficulty finding a
>>> name that is meaningful and has no trademark issues.  I
>>> thought that a lot
>>> of people were interested in this project because the code
>>> and individuals
>>> from XFire and the code and individuals from Celtix are very
>>> high quality
>>> and complementary in many ways and as a single project and
>>> community with a
>>> focused effort it can be even better and even more people
>>> would want to use
>>> and get involved with this project.  From that perspective, I
>>> thought that
>>> the CeltiXfire name was appropriate.
>>> - 1 to changing
>>> On 9/3/06, Kevin Conner <> wrote:
>>>> +1 to changing.

View raw message