hi David, sorry for that, but his points make me to blow chunk, this is painful and so pretentious
Best, On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 3:58 PM, David Anderson<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 15:55, mm w<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> that name because of a name >> conflict was unacceptable. >> >> pauvre petit canard on va se mettre a chialer, please stop mariejuana >> and use your brain... > > Please stop spamming the list with useless and insulting comments, or > you will be removed from it. Sorry to be so blunt, but that kind of > language is plain unacceptable when addressing strangers in polite > company. > > - Dave > >> >> On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Strahinja<[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Dear David, >>> >>> I understand that how much I like my project name and that I would go >>> to a different project hosting service have no bearing on your >>> decision. They were not written as arguments meant to convince you to >>> remove the block: the fact that the other project has been dead for >>> six years was. >>> >>> I merely wanted to state my position. I wanted to explain why I didn't >>> just chose a different name. It's not merely a matter of preference; >>> this name has been picked a while ago and time and resources were >>> already committed to it. Having to change that name because of a name >>> conflict was unacceptable. >>> >>> This leads us to "I'll go somewhere else": it was not meant as any >>> sort of threat or tantrum: if you perceived them as such, you have my >>> apologies. The point I was trying to illustrate was that this policy >>> is--at least in my view--ineffective. I understand the principles >>> behind it, and I applaud the intent, but in the end there's little >>> point to it. There are many hosting providers out there, and one could >>> always just pick one that doesn't check for name conflicts with other >>> services. >>> >>> But you are standing on this as a matter of principle, and I respect >>> that. I do agree with you, I just think the cons outweigh the pros. >>> But hey, it's your service. >>> >>> Lastly, I'd like to thank you for removing the block and for such a >>> prompt response. >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> Strahinja >>> >>> On Jul 24, 12:26 pm, David Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Project created and assigned to you. Don't forget to edit the summary, >>>> description, license and labels in the administration panel. Details >>>> follow. >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 02:16, Strahinja<[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > I encountered a problem while trying to create a project on google >>>> > code. I picked "sigil" for my project name, and the system informed me >>>> > of a name conflict with a project from Sourceforge. That project is >>>> > located here:http://sourceforge.net/projects/sigil/ >>>> >>>> > That project is about "providing services for asynchronous play of pen- >>>> > and-paper d20 RPGs. It is designed to be a solution for players of >>>> > play-by-post or play-by-email gaming." My project is a WYSIWYG ebook >>>> > editor. The two have nothing in common, except the name. Also, the >>>> > last commit for that project was on Jun 23 2003, a full six years ago. >>>> > It seems utterly dead now. >>>> >>>> The actual thing that makes it okay for us to override the lockout is >>>> that the project is stillborn: it was created 2223 days ago, and has >>>> had zero activity since. Specifically, no code was ever published >>>> according to the CVS log. >>>> >>>> > My project has been named Sigil for quite some time, the code just >>>> > hasn't been released. Currently it's about 15k lines of code, and the >>>> > name has grown on me over the past few months. Logos and icons have >>>> > been designed, "about" screens have been developed etc. I'd rather not >>>> > be forced to change all that. It would be unfortunate if I had to >>>> > rename it because of some other project that has been long dead. >>>> >>>> > That, and Google Code hosting is not the only hosting provider in >>>> > universe. It's the one I want to use, but I'll just go somewhere else >>>> > if I have to. Please don't be offended by that. >>>> >>>> I'd just like to point out that the two arguments you presented here >>>> don't have much weight in the problem: if you chose to name your >>>> project "Gnome", I'd have to refuse the project creation no matter how >>>> much you like the name. >>>> >>>> The same goes for stating you'll go somewhere else if we don't comply: >>>> if we feel that it would be wrong to give out a conflicting project >>>> name (eg. the "Gnome" example), and you disagree, then you're >>>> absolutely free and welcome to use another open source hosting >>>> platform. But whether you'll stay or leave has no influence on whether >>>> it would be inappropriate or not to duplicate an existing project >>>> name, and so is completely irrelevant, to be frank. >>>> >>>> That said, in this case it was a straightforward decision to create >>>> the project, since the other has nothing. So, enjoy your stay on >>>> Google Code! >>>> >>>> - Dave >>> >>> > >>> >> >> > >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hosting at Google Code" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-code-hosting?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
