On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 22:58, Les Hazlewood <lhazlew...@apache.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Bernd Fondermann < > bernd.fonderm...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > What I don't get is why would anyone want to keep the name if there >> are potential overlaps or troubles ahead? >> I mean, there are probably better (coding) and harder (releasing, >> graduating) things to do than getting stuck about the name. >> Why don't you (as a podling) simply move on with another cool name, >> for example, just brainstorming here... "JSecurity"... or something >> similar? > > > JSecurity was deemed as a potential naming conflict risk (much in the same > way Ki is now), so we dropped it, and finally came to a vote to change the > name to Ki. But this resolution took over 4 or 5 months to finally come to > a favorable vote, so we didn't want to go through that painful process all > over again, since it seemed like no one was willing to come to consensus on > other names. It is very difficult to find an even remotely-correlated name > in the security space that might not infringe on another > site/company/product/trademark/patent.
ok, I see. At least, for JSecurity, these conflicts never came up, did they? That's why so many project go with names from biona or mythology. > Given the difficulty and the enormous amount of time spent already, we just > wanted to move on to focus exactly on the things you mention, and only worry > about changing the name yet again if it was absolutely required by the > Incubator to do so. That being said, if the Incubator says "the Ki podling > must change its name", then fine, we'll be happy to do so, but most of us > didn't want to spend the effort worrying about it unless necessary. To me, it seems neccessary, but this is just my 2 eurocent. Bernd --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
