I second that. Ki was just downright obscure.
Ben
Tim Veil wrote:
for what its worth, I think Apache Security or Apache Security API
sounds pretty darn cool. If I were evaluating security frameworks, i
would put this framework at the top of the list because of the apache
name alone. the name is direct, self explanatory and permanently
fixed to a fairly recognizable brand ;)
Tim
On Mar 12, 2009, at 6:47 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:
Kalle Korhonen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny
<[email protected]>wrote:
Is it up for a bet?
It was just a joke :)
I'm just saying that if that thread was the only
discussion on it, it looked indecisive. If Les had more private
discussion
with the company's representatives then it'd be entirely different
matter.
Have you or anybody asked ASF legal? If legal is not available for
exactly
these types of questions, then I don't know what its purpose is.
Just FYI, it's now more than two months we are discussing about this
name issue. If we decided to switch from JSecurity to Ki, it was
because Juniper Computer is already using J-Security. It appears that
the FlyerWhatever company is also using Ki, and they made us know
about it.
I don't want to rehash the hundred (almost) of mails exchanged, but
be sure we already asked Legal about that, and Legal don't care,
unless we get sued. Legal don't have the time nor the men to deal
with name collision. It's up to us to find a name unlikely to be
jeopardized by an existing name.
We thought that Ki was safe, and agreed about it. Bad move, and this
is very unfortunate. But in any case, we don't have time nor money to
start a dispute about the Ki name, and it's more likely that we would
lost less time discussing about a new name than trying to unforce the
existing one.
I'm not pleased at all about this situation, trust me on that.
PS: http://www.apache.org/legal/. This will give you some info about
what Legal is about.
--
--
cordialement, regards,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
directory.apache.org
