I agree with Emmanuel... I believe we should start looking for a new name. I propose to have another e-mail thread started by the development team to narrow the circle around the proposed names, and then we make a [VOTE] on the most selected one. Thoughts ?
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Emmanuel Lecharny <[email protected]> wrote: > Frankly, [email protected] will say that we are incubating, and that the PPMC should > handle this issue. > > Now, the rational is that we would not like to have an issue when the > project is promoted to TLP. Such an issue can be some big company sending > The ASF a letter requesting us to change the project name. That would be not > only a legal annoyance, but also a problem if the project is established as > a TLP for a few month. > > Here, it's more about mitigating potential problems than to be legally > protected. Remember that legal.a.o is not there to tell us what's right and > wrong (you need to go to court for such decision) but to advise us about > what would be best for the project, legally wise. > > You still can send a mail to legal.a.o, it cost nothing. > > Now, if you have to pick a new name, just select something that either is > absolutely free (xarkily or tropqualu for instance), or a common name > associated with Apache, for instance Apache Asynchronous Web Framework (it's > just an example). > > Be smart :) > > On 8/24/11 9:48 AM, Julien Vermillard wrote: >> >> looks like a no for me :) >> >> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Johnathan Meehan >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> 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 :-) >>>>>>>>> >>> >>> > > > -- > Regards, > Cordialement, > Emmanuel Lécharny > www.iktek.com > > -- Thanks - Mohammad Nour ---- "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving" - Albert Einstein
