james-mime4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Norman Maurer <nor...@apache.org>
Subject Re: mime4j maven artifact names
Date Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:39:11 GMT
To be hornest, I think renaming it would help us shorten the artifact
names so after thinkin more on it I think it would make sense to cut
of the prefix

Bye
Norman
2010/2/6, Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Norman Maurer <norman@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I think it was Robert who sugguest it in the past
>>>
>>> Anyway I would be happy without the prefix too.
>>>
>>> So +0
>>
>> the reasoning behind the prefix goes like this. apache mime4j is the
>> trademark. anyone can produce another jar and call it mime4j. if
>> someone produces an apache-mime4j jar with nefarious or substandard
>> contents then apache is in a stronger position.
>>
>> but i don't think this has been written in stone and dates back to the
>> misty old days. if people prefer just mime4j then ask on legal discuss
>> for a definitive modern ruling.
>>
>> - robert
>>
>
> Robert et al
>
> I cant think of any project other than James that makes use of such
> naming convention, but I guess it is more important that things stay
> consistent within the same project.
>
> Forget my suggestion
>
> Oleg
>

Mime
View raw message