That's fine. I was just thinking that since the community was so small, getting a higher participation would be helpful. [Of course, settling on a name and ending all of this voting would be even more helpful.]

-- Jack Krupansky

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Mark Miller" <markrmil...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 5:04 PM
To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF

That's really too high a bar. This community is still small. These types
of procedural votes are majority votes. 3 days is always given to give
plenty of time to vote.

If you insist, I don't see why we can't keep the vote open for another
day or two, but I don't think it makes much sense to add some random
minimum number of votes needed. It doesn't really jive with how Apache
communities have worked in the past IMO.

The 3 days takes into account waiting a good amount of time for a vote -
adding a couple/few days, fine - but -1 to some kind of minimum voices
needed.

How many people are actually active on this project currently? 1.75? And
you want 8 votes? We are lucky to have drawn in the bystanders votes we
have.

- Mark

On 9/29/10 4:56 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
Can we stick with a 8-person minimum quorum for this and most other
votes? In other words the vote closes at the deadline if there is a
quorum, other it stays open until 5 p.m. after there is a quorum.

-- Jack Krupansky

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <daddy...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:38 PM
To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF

<= 0 means failure.

Karl

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Jack Krupansky
<jack.krupan...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
Ah, okay, that's cool. So if the vote fails (<= 0 or < 0?), we would
then
vote on the next choice, which is... "Manicon".

-- Jack Krupansky

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <daddy...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:01 PM
To: <connectors-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF

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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>






Reply via email to