-1 to changing the name. Personally i dont see changing the name is required and i dont understand why we are voting on this. As it was stated before, lot of effort and thought process has gone into this and without a concrete option it is hard to vote.
I agree with Dan Diephouse that there is some amount of marketing benefit as well to keep the name CeltiXfire. thanks, Adi Sakala > -----Original Message----- > From: Debbie Moynihan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 8:40 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [vote] Do we want to change the name > > > Well I believe that if you don't like a name then at least a > better one > should be proposed. While some suggestions have been > interesting, I haven't > seen any suggestions so far that are super compelling. I > have been reading > them all and was curious to see if someone would come up with a better > name. I thought Foam was an interesting concept for example, > although I > believe that one had some trademark issues. I didn't personally have > anything to do with selecting the "Celtix" or "XFire" names for either > project and the idea of picking a new name was somewhat > attractive when I > was working on the proposal for merging these projects and > moving the code > to Apache. Then we brainstormed and ran into a lot of > difficulty finding a > name that is meaningful and has no trademark issues. I > thought that a lot > of people were interested in this project because the code > and individuals > from XFire and the code and individuals from Celtix are very > high quality > and complementary in many ways and as a single project and > community with a > focused effort it can be even better and even more people > would want to use > and get involved with this project. From that perspective, I > thought that > the CeltiXfire name was appropriate. > > - 1 to changing > > On 9/3/06, Kevin Conner < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > +1 to changing. > > > > >
