Yeah, I thought about this as well, and it might be a little misleading as an umbrella project. I mean, sure, we want to be the most comprehensive security project out there (that is still easy to use), but such a name might imply that our primary objective would be to support almost any security case needed by the ASF. I'm not sure we want that implicit responsibility. Maybe we do, I dunno...
What about taking just any name from the Apache language itself? It doesn't have to mean anything security related, as long as it isn't in use. At least then its a little more 'in the family'... Thoughts? On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 3:36 AM, David Jencks <[email protected]>wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Les Hazlewood wrote: > > Per this thread: >> >> http://www.jsecurity.org/node/1081#comment-289 >> >> It appears that we can't use Ki. >> >> So far the development team seems to be happy with "Apache Security API", >> which can have (good) far reaching implications for a good quality >> framework. Any objections? >> > > I think it implies that this project is happy to include all java security > work at apache. For instance, would you be happy to include a xamcl jacc > implementation that did not use your Subject but rather the JAAS subject? > It would certainly be a java security implementation but AFAICT has little > to no overlap with what you are doing now. > > I think it also has a connotation that apache has somehow approved your api > and all projects needing java security are expected to use it. > > Dunno if anyone else gets these ideas from the name but I do. And I'm > certainly not implying anything about the nature or quality of this > project.... just that naming one project for the entire field of which it is > an example may not be without problems and implications. > > thanks > david jencks > > > >> >> - Les >> > >
