I think that, provided that we decide to change name, we should choose a completely new one to avoid confusion between Leelo and Apache Amber.
+1 for a new name. Tommaso 2012/12/7 Antonio Sanso <[email protected]> > > On Dec 7, 2012, at 11:46 AM, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > > > thanks for bringing this to the table Antonio, if I recall correctly when > > the name change is usually encouraged when there's already at least one > > other software with the same name, in this case we're also talking about > > OSS so it may be the case :-( > > Indeed my main "concerns" about the name Amber comes from this search > > http://www.ohloh.net/p?page=1&q=amber&ref=homepage&sort=relevance > > Regards > > Antonio > > > > What do others think? > > Tommaso > > > > > > 2012/12/7 Antonio Sanso <[email protected]> > > > >> Hi *, > >> > >> some time ago I have opened PODLINGNAMESEARCH-12 [0] in order to double > >> check Apache Amber will be a suitable name. > >> > >> I am still working on it but at a first glance it looks that this name > >> might overlap with some other pre-existing software. > >> So we might need to change the final name... :S > >> > >> WDYT? > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Antonio > >> > >> > >> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PODLINGNAMESEARCH-12 > >
