incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <>
Subject Re: [RFC] draft stdcxx resolution for the Board
Date Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:23:59 GMT
Eric Lemings wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [] 
>> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 7:29 PM
>> To:
>> Subject: Re: [RFC] draft stdcxx resolution for the Board
>> Eric Lemings wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Martin Sebor [] 
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 2:59 PM
>>>> To:
>>>> Subject: [RFC] draft stdcxx resolution for the Board
>>>> I'm working on the Board resolution based on the following page:
>>>> and I have a few issues I need help with. I'm hoping that our
>>>> mentors can give us guidance here, although I certainly encourage
>>>> everyone else, most of all committers, to read through this and
>>>> provide feedback.
>>>> 1. Official project name: Apache C++ Standard Library
>>>> I have always assumed that the official name of our project is
>>>> the Apache C++ Standard Library, and that STDCXX is an "acronym"
>>>> or "keyword" (e.g., the same way APR is to the Apache Portable
>>>> Runtime Project). I'm not 100% sure that everyone shares the
>>>> same view so I'm looking for a confirmation that "Apache C++
>>>> Standard Library" is an acceptable name to use in the resolution.
>>>> (The attached proposed resolution assumes the answer is
>>>> affirmative.)
>>> I agree with the canonical name.  As for the acronym, I'd like to
>>> propose "ASL".
>> Not ASCXXL? ;-)
> Too clever I guess, some may say obfuscated.  :-P
>> I'm not sure if we can easily change this or even that we should
>> try. What would happen to Jira or mailing lists? I suppose lists
>> could have aliases, but it might be additional work for the infra
>> team.
>> But if you're serious about it go ahead and make a formal proposal
>> to change it. Far be if for me to discourage you but I expect you
>> will need to have a really compelling rationale to convince
>> everyone, especially the rest of the Incubator, that it's a good
>> idea.
> Good idea?  Not sure.  Better acronym?  I think so.

I agree it's easier to pronounce and probably will be easier to
remember. If it was easy to change I'd be all for it. The issue
is that a) I don't know how easy it would be to change, and b)
I may not have the bandwidth to try to find out. If you would
like to try I'll support you but you'll have to do the legwork.
I.e., find out (either from our mentors or from the rest of the
Incubator) how difficult such a change would be, how we would
go about implementing it, and by how long it would delay our

> Hypothetical scenario: another acronym is proposed, be it "ASL" or
> whatever, and it is well received.  Unanimously in fact.
> Would all this required work still be worth the change?  If the answer
> is yes, then it's a good idea.
> I just have the feeling that people will associate "STDCXX" more with
> Rogue Wave Software rather than the Apache Foundation.  So in that
> respect, ANY new acronym will be a better choice.

I'm not sure I see why that would be the case. We (Rogue Wave)
have made it clear that stdcxx is the Apache implementation of
the C++ Standard Library:


View raw message