We're trying for an up/down confirmation of ManifoldCF as a new name for the project. If it succeeds, that's our name. If it fails, it's on to the next-highest-ranking choice. Right now score is 0.
Karl On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jack Krupansky <jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com> wrote: > My apologies for not vetting connex properly. I actually do recall seeing > the sourceforge project project now when reminded of it, but I was working > too quickly and didn't get around to editing my list right away and forgot > about it. And I assumed that Karl was going to vet names "properly" anyway. > So... it's my fault that "manicon" wasn't there as the top choice when > people voted! > > In any case, I think I have lost track of where we were in the process... > voting +1/-1 on keeping ManifoldCF vs. staying with Apache Connectors > Framework, I think? And with other Karl and I voting on that so far (+1 and > -1)? I'll let Karl send out a proper reminder of wherever he says we are. > > -- Jack Krupansky > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Karl Wright" <daddy...@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM > To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF > >> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two months >> now? >> >> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some >> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our >> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we >> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected, >> ranked in order. >> >> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same >> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection, >> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a >> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not >> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that. >> >> Karl >> >> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <u...@odoko.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four >>> syllable rule :-) >>> >>> How about Manifole? >>> >>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I >>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you, >>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at >>> which point the vote is a mere formality. >>> >>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is >>> going to stay with us all for a long time! >>> >>> Upayavira >>> >>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right >>> >>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote: >>>> >>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like >>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title >>>> choices I've offered myself here. >>>> >>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and >>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times? >>>> >>>> Karl >>>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <daddy...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following > >>>> > ways: >>>> > >>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF" >>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF" >>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF" >>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold >>>> > Connectors Framework" >>>> > >>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since >>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the >>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be >>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably >>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in >>>> > Action". >>>> > >>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be > >>>> > used? >>>> > >>>> > Karl >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky >>>> > <jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com> wrote: >>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually >>>> >> >> use it >>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go >>>> >> >> along >>>> >> with the majority. >>>> >> >>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky >>>> >> >>>> >> -------------------------------------------------- >>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <daddy...@gmail.com> >>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM >>>> >> To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org> >>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF >>>> >> >>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 >>>> >>> >>> from >>>> >>> me. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Karl >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <markrmil...@gmail.com> >>>> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but >>>>> >>>> >>>>> having this >>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical >>>> >>>>> >>>>> than >>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having >>>> >>>>> >>>>> to use >>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name. >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" >>>> >>>>> >>>>> violates >>>> >>>>> selection rule #5: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.) >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> That's five syllables. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having >>>> >>>> >>>> too >>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted >>>> >>>> >>>> name - >>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the >>>> >>>>> >>>>> spirit >>>> >>>>> of rule #1: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to >>>> >>>> >>>> ignore. >>>> >>>> This is no argument. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19 >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping >>>> >>>> >>>> the >>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so >>>> >>>> >>>> sick of >>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the >>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> -------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <daddy...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM >>>> >>>>> To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org> >>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>>>> >>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Jack, >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> by >>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> that >>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> a >>>> >>>>>> good choice. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Karl >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky >>>> >>>>>> <jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman. >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really >>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for >>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed. >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <markrmil...@gmail.com> >>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM >>>> >>>>>>> To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org> >>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing? >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF. >>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to >>>> >>>>>>>>> retain >>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote. >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday. >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However, >>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> label >>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> vote >>>> >>>>>>>>> is >>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the >>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context. >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl >>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >>>> > >>> >>> >>> >
