Unfortunately I think you are right. A new [VOTE] thread is inevitable. // Roger
On Aug 24, 2011, at 1:41 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din wrote: > 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
