geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jason Warner" <jaw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: J2G future positioning
Date Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:50:58 GMT
I was trying to come up with something like that myself.  I like the idea of
keeping the 2.  Somehow, "Migrate 2 Geronimo" was too obscure for me to
grasp.  Thanks for ending my mental struggle, Joe.

~Jason Warner

On 10/29/07, Joe Bohn <joe.bohn@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Kevan Miller wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 10/29/07, *Tim McConnell* <tim.mcconne@gmail.com
> > <mailto:tim.mcconne@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi, Does anyone have any thoughts as to how we'll position the J2G
> >     plugin in the
> >     future ?? I understand now that in its initial iteration that it is
> >     narrowly
> >     scoped to work for JBoss specific migrations only (thus the JBoss in
> >     the name).
> >     However, it seems if we want to eventually enhance it as a more
> >     generic tool for
> >     migrating multiple applications to Geronimo (which I would hope we
> >     would), it
> >     might be a good time now to reconsider a more generic and/or
> >     appropriate name.
> >     Any thoughts ??
> >
> >
> > I think it's a good idea to call it a "migration tool". We definitely
> > should not be using the name "JBoss". j2g would be ok (though i'd be in
> > favor of a generic name).
>
> I agree.  What's not to like about a generic migration tool to get
> people on Geronimo even if the first version only works when you migrate
> from JBoss? :-)
>
> Personally, I'd still like to see the "2" in the name.  How about M2G
> (Migrate to Geronimo)?  The problem with something like "Geronimo
> Migration tool" or even just "migration tool" is that the direction
> isn't clear and we definitely want it to be known that we're helping you
> migrate to Geronimo.
>
> Joe
>

Mime
View raw message