On 12/2/2013 1:28 PM, Sean Mullan wrote:
'j' sounds reasonable to me. However, I'm not really sure if the 'j2'
here is from 'j2se', 'j2re', or 'j2sdk', I would have to ask some
developers who did the original implementation. It could have been
simply to help avoid naming clashes with other software using these
names. A search for libjpkcs11.so brings up a few results. If that's
the case, I would prefer to leave the names as is.
As Mark indicated its from a marketing name.
When JDK 1.2 was shipped it branded as "Java 2".
It didn't mean version 1.2, it was just a name. Other names were
considered too,
I still remember the ripple of horror around the large, packed, room
when the initial
proposal was revealed but that was dropped in favour of Java 2.
-phil.
