Cool idea - I like the possibilities with that pronunciation. Alex
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]>wrote: > The only one that I feel like would make sense, that didn't have > name/patent > conflicts, is Apache Ki. > > Its a very short name, so that's kinda nice (domain name, packages, etc). > And there is a lot of room for graphics/branding - since it is pronounced > "key", lots can be done to tie in to the security theme. That's a rather > elegant middle ground I think would work nicely for a security framework. > > To me, nothing else out there that I've heard thus far (that also doesn't > have naming conflicts) sounds better than Ki or JSecurity. > > What do you think Jeremy - do you think Ki might be good enough to supplant > the JSecurity name? > > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:45 PM, Jeremy Haile <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I think we do need to put some concrete plan in place here, so I think a > > vote is in order. > > > > I support changing the name, if we come up with a name that we like. > > Unfortunately, I don't like most of the ideas that haven't already shown > to > > be in conflict with some project out there. I did like Apache Fortress, > > Stronghold, and Shield, but I think these could be more problematic than > > JSecurity. > > > > Given that, I'd prefer to leave the name as it is until we come up with > > something that has more popular support. We do need to go ahead and > > repackage everything, so this question is holding up a lot of work. > Let's > > make a decision! > > > > Jeremy > > > > > > > > On Dec 27, 2008, at 8:29 PM, Les Hazlewood wrote: > > > > As this needs to be clearly resolved before we exit the Incubator, I > >> believe > >> that we have 2 questions that we need to vote on formally: > >> > >> 1. Will JSecurity be renamed? > >> 2. If so, what will that new name be? > >> > >> Should we start a vote for #1, and depending on its outcome, then have a > >> vote for #2? > >> > >> I surface #1 because I don't think we as a team reached a clear > consensus > >> as > >> to whether or not we must do that. I'd like to just formalize that > intent > >> in a vote just to make it absolutely clear. > >> > >> The only feedback we got from Legal about retaining the JSecurity name > was > >> from Henri Yandell: > >> > >> "Given that it's a name you've been using for 4 years, and it's very > >> generic [jXxx being a common pattern in our space and Security being > >> very generic]; I'm inclined to keep the current name; though by the > >> same reasoning, it's a weak name as "Apache JSecurity" isn't very good > >> branding." > >> > >> indicating that Legal apparently doesn't perceive a naming conflict (no > >> one > >> else made any comments in over 2 weeks). If that is the case, it > appears > >> the decision is left to the project team, which seems like a vote would > be > >> in order. > >> > >> Please note that I have no ulterior motive in kicking this thread off - > >> I've > >> become quite accustomed to one or two of the other proposed names and > have > >> no problems using them if the team decides that is the appropriate > course > >> of > >> action. I'm just trying to resolve both of these two questions > >> definitively > >> before next month's board report, which is coming up very soon. > >> > >> What should we do next? > >> > >> - Les > >> > > > > >
