ok, another idea: Mojo Extras (I just reserved the github org) = Mojo (ie plugins for Maven) that can't be hosted at ASF for license issues, or generally less strict rules about anything (which comes at a price: this is not a foundation, no dev protection, or anything the rules are done for)
I'm not trying anything to replace Codehaus name itself, because Codehaus is really wide Regards, Hervé Le jeudi 5 mars 2015 15:51:03 vous avez écrit : > Hello Hervé, > > I would suggest that "mojo" is quite unknown for most developers (who are > non-maven-plugin developers) out there. > Few would even contemplate calling the plugins by their full - or even > abbreviated - name. > Whenever I hear people talking about a plugin, they simply say "the aspectj > plugin" or equivalent. > Not "the aspectj-maven-plugin" - and definitely not "Mojo's > aspectj-maven-plugin". > > Hence, I don't think that the Mojo "brand" is well-known at all (actually, > it is more confusing since it can be mixed up with the name of the Mojo > interface and AbstractMojo implementation). > I don't even believe that the "Codehaus" brand is well-known to the > genereal development community. > If anything, the names of the plugins themselves *could* be known. > > So ... if we are going to refactor the Codehaus codebase and organisation, > let's do it to best match the future demands. > > I would also suggest being *very* clear about presenting the reason that > the Codehaus/Mojo project develops Maven plugins instead of the projects > themselves. > For example - it would seem apparent that the AspectJ project should > develop an aspectj-maven-plugin. > However, that plugin is developed by Codehaus, and I believe that we should > be a bit clearer in documenting why. > > Fair? > > 2015-03-05 9:24 GMT+01:00 Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr>: > > Le mercredi 4 mars 2015 14:16:08 vous avez écrit : > > > *Project name* > > > May not be a concern, but that needs to be cleared out sooner than > > > later. > > > I think that one of the most pressing subject may indeed not be > > > technical > > > but about the name of our project: what name should/could we use for the > > > project. > > > > > > Should/could it stay "'Codehaus Mojo" on GitHub even after Codehaus EOL > > > (meaning we'd certainly use https://github.com/codehaus-mojo org)? or > > > "Maven Mojo" (which would make googling for it quite difficult btw)? Or > > > change the project name even more? > > > > -1 to "Maven Mojo": trademark concern on Maven (Apache Maven, to be > > precise) > > could be "Mojo for Maven" > > > > why not just "Mojo" as the project name? > > AFAIK, it has become a well known name lately: is there really a need for > > "XXX > > Mojo", whatever XXX is? > > > > Regards, > > > > Hervé > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
