And me. github id: davidkarlsen
codehaus id: david 14. mars 2015 14:11 skrev "Karl Heinz Marbaise" <khmarba...@gmx.de>: > Hi Hervé, > > On 3/14/15 1:43 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote: > >> ok, we have a clear winner: MojoHaus >> (and we'll have a statement like "formerly known as Codehaus Mojo >> project" on >> our website once migrated) >> > > >> >> I created the github organization: https://github.com/MojoHaus >> >> what are the next steps? >> > > Migration of the plugins to git repos...? > > > BTW: Could you please add me to the organization... > > Kind regards > Karl Heinz Marbaise > > >> Regards, >> >> Hervé >> >> Le mercredi 11 mars 2015 08:54:09 Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit : >> >>> then we have a few proposals: >>> - Mojo Extras >>> - MojoHaus >>> - The Mojo Project >>> >>> >>> I really like MojoHaus >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Hervé >>> >>> Le mardi 10 mars 2015 09:28:59 vous avez écrit : >>> >>>> I think it's a bad idea to not include the "Mojo" name in some form. The >>>> project has been around for over 10 years now and it widely known and >>>> used >>>> in the Maven community. >>>> >>>> I think Mojo Extras is a good name, I would like to propose "The Mojo >>>> Project". >>>> >>>> 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 > > >
