Technically, "Apache Ignite" is the project trademark (which could be
registered, if needed). Hence the longer name is probably more correct.

Cos

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 07:31AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan wrote:
> +1 for Ignite.NET or Apache Ignite.NET. I think both should be valid.
> 
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> 
> > Raul, good point!
> >
> > I have no information about .Net trademark, but other products use ".NET"
> > without a blank space.
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 4:37 PM, Raul Kripalani <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I like Ignite.NET.
> > >
> > > I wonder if the .NET portion may be trademarked by Microsoft. If that's
> > the
> > > case, I guess we cannot put a blank space between Ignite and .NET (Ignite
> > > .NET), it'll all need to be a single word, like proposed.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > *Raúl Kripalani*
> > > PMC & Committer @ Apache Ignite, Apache Camel | Integration, Big Data and
> > > Messaging Engineer
> > > http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani
> > > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > Let's agree on the final name of our .Net product. For now it is
> > > referenced
> > > > in various places as "Apache Ignite .Net", "Apache Ignite for .Net",
> > > > "Apache Ignite .Net platform", etc..
> > > >
> > > > Ports of other Java projects to .Net are usually named as
> > > "[Product].NET".
> > > > E.g. Akka.NET, Spring.NET.
> > > >
> > > > I suggest use the same scheme and pick the name "Apache Ignite.NET".
> > > >
> > > > Any ideas or objections?
> > > >
> > > > Vladimir.
> > > >
> > >
> >

Reply via email to