Rüdiger Timm wrote: > > Joerg Barfurth wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Laurent Godard wrote: >> >>> - extensions.openoffice.org (already 3 votes) >> >> >> -1, >> >> We already have a cvs module named 'extensions' in the 'util' project. >> >> This situation (a module in one project is named like another project) >> is prone to cause confusion. Unfortunately we already have at least one >> case of this situation (module util/tools vs. project tools), but IMHO >> we should proliferate it any more. >> >> Ciao, Joerg >> > > The same holds true for 'scripting', as there is a module with this very > name in project 'framework'. > This leaves 'addon' as the only candidate: > addon.openoffice.org +1
The modules are not visible to the outside world except when you deal with cvs and getting source code from it. As far as I expect the new project is not a coding project but a documentation and content providing project so I think we can bear this "name clash". OTOH "addon" is a bad as "scripting" because *both* are technical terms that just describe a single aspect of what the project is about. "extensions" is much better suited for the project: it is a non-technical term and it is understandable by everyone. It describes the project as something about extending OOo by everything that adds functionality to it, be it Add-Ons, Add-Ins, other UNO components or macros, templates etc. Besides that it would be nice to use a name that sounds familiar to developers outside OOo - "extensions" are well known from the Mozilla project. So +1 for extensions. Best regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
