gee, was too fast. Amending my vote to
+0 (I'm fine with both) LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Monday, 17 June 2013, 7:28 > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Bean Validation Module Name > > +1 > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: John D. Ament <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: >> Sent: Monday, 17 June 2013, 2:42 >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Bean Validation Module Name >> >> [+1] beanval >> >> BTW, I'll leave this open for about 72 hours. >> >> John >> >> >> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 8:42 PM, John D. Ament >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> All >>> >>> Based on the thread thus far, I'd like to call a vote. These are > the >> two >>> names the seem to have the least angst: >>> >>> beanval >>> bean-validation >>> >>> So, to vote please respond with a +1 or a -1. +1 is for >> "beanval" but -1 >>> is for "bean-validation" >>> >>> I'm not including bv due to the US English connotations. I'm > not >>> including bval due to the existing apache project plus references to > other >>> names I saw in a quick google search. >>> >>> - John >>> >> >
