Mailing-List: contact general-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@lucene.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
From: "Uwe Schindler" <uwe@thetaphi.de>
To: <general@lucene.apache.org>
References: <B420AE28-327B-403C-8641-F7175B9E8E7C@apache.org>
 <2D127F11DC79714E9B6A43AC9458147F805F1492@suex07-mbx-03.ad.syr.edu>
In-Reply-To: 
 <2D127F11DC79714E9B6A43AC9458147F805F1492@suex07-mbx-03.ad.syr.edu>
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Lucene Java -> Lucene Core
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 19:02:37 +0100
Message-ID: <000001cb7f6f$219f8170$64de8450$@thetaphi.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQKD8/QQ9XfwdKdklBJPxdb56ZaSAAKCj+NmkeLcsaA=
Content-Language: de

Die, Contrib, die! We will hopefully only have modules soon?

+1 to "Lucene Core", "Lucene Modules" and "Solr". As qualifier we can =
use "for Java" to differentiate from .NET. But in my opinion, all others =
should be separate projects and the main project is called "Lucene =
Family for Java" (without family but I like it).

Uwe

P.S.: Else let's call it "Apache Lucene Harmony" *g*

-----
Uwe Schindler
H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, D-28213 Bremen
http://www.thetaphi.de
eMail: uwe@thetaphi.de


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven A Rowe [mailto:sarowe@syr.edu]
> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 6:11 PM
> To: general@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Lucene Java -> Lucene Core
>=20
> One small concern: "core" already means something within Lucene Java.
>=20
> So we'd have Lucene Core core (as opposed to contrib).
>=20
> Should cores have cores?  It seems against the will of universe =
somehow.
>=20
> Steve
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsingers@apache.org]
> > Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 10:58 AM
> > To: general list
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] Lucene Java -> Lucene Core
> >
> > Hi Luceneers, esp. PMC and Committers,
> >
> > I'm in the process of reviewing our branding per the Trademarks =
committee
> > sending out requirements.   So, expect to see some changes to the =
website
> > and logos in the coming days as well as, potentially, a request for =
help.
> >
> > Per the Branding Requirements at
> > http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/pmcs, I think we should stop
> > calling our core Java implementation Lucene Java, since Java is an
> > Oracle TM, and move to simply calling it Lucene Core or Lucene for =
Java.
> >
> > I'm inclined to call it Lucene Core or (Core, for short).  Most of =
us
> > just call it Lucene anyway, so the Core part really is only for
> > navigation purposes on the website.
> >
> > I'd like to discuss this for a day or two and then call a vote.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > -Grant