Did anybody reach out to [email protected] about this yet?
On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 15:22 +0200, Roger Schildmeijer wrote:
> Yes, that sounds like a good idea.
>
> // Roger
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Julien Vermillard
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > IF is the key word here :) Are we supposed to raise the question on
> > [email protected] ?
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Roger Schildmeijer
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > If we really need to change the name, then that's the approach I would
> > > advocate.
> > >
> > > // Roger
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Séven Le Mesle <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I agree on the on this point against AsyncWeb.
> > >> Maybe we can extend Deft name with a suffix or prefix :).
> > >>
> > >> Séven.
> > >>
> > >> 2011/8/19 Roger Schildmeijer <[email protected]>
> > >>
> > >> > I'm -1 on asyncweb. I agree with Niklas. The confusion would be
> > >> maximized.
> > >> > If we really have to change the name, then I guess we should start a
> > name
> > >> > survey. If it's avoidable I would be happy :)
> > >> >
> > >> > // Roger
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Niklas Gustavsson <
> > [email protected]
> > >> > >wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny <
> > >> [email protected]
> > >> > >
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > > Not necessarily if asyncweb is merged into deft (and by merge, I
> > mean
> > >> > > > vanish...).
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I was more thinking of people who might actually know about asyncweb
> > >> > > and it's history. When all of a sudden a new code base occurs under
> > >> > > the same name, I think confusion would happen :-)
> > >> > >
> >
