On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Gerhard Petracek <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 for Apache BVal
Simo's reasoning here is sound: using the same name as already-released artifacts is a sound strategy. > +1 for Apache OpenBeanValidation There is also good reason to consider this name IMO, as it conforms nicely alongside OpenEJB, OpenJPA and OpenWebBeans. I don't have a strong preference between these two options. Matt > -1 for Apache BeanValidation (too similar compared to the name of the spec. > - at least it might be confusing for users,...) > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2012/1/10 Simone Tripodi <[email protected]> > >> Hi Mark! >> >> I honestly think that, even if I don't like the BVAL acronym, since we >> already released artifacts with bval-* prefix, BVAL should be the name >> of the project. >> >> Just my 0.02 cents, all the best! >> -Simo >> >> http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >> http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >> http://www.99soft.org/ >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:20 PM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi folks! >> > >> > While running the VOTE on general@incubator, I spotted a problem with >> the project name in our graduation proposal >> > >> > "Apache Bean Validation" >> > >> > >> > is imo just too similar to the spec name itself >> > >> > "Bean Validation" >> > >> > http://jcp.org/en/jsr/summary?id=303 >> > >> > Although it's not trademarked, it might not really be trademarkable at >> all! >> > >> > I think that "BeanValidation" might serve us better, or even use "Apache >> BVAL" as project name. >> > >> > I now updated our graduation proposal to "BeanValidation" >> > >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/BeanValidation/Graduation+Proposal >> > >> > Is this ok for anyone? >> > Or should we go for BVAL at all? >> > >> > LieGrue, >> > strub >> > >>
