Les I agree with you about the potential for the name to be a bit misleading. I think that point alone is worth some serious discussion.
One more thought about the name... If we were discussing a new name for some social network or other web 2.0 gimmick I would agree that we should should strive to find a "Web 2.0y" name. As a security framework I don't think we need hold ourselves to that standard. In this space, I think the more obvious and straightforward the name is the more successful we could be. I know there are dozens of examples that support and contradict this point, but "commons-lang" doesn't suffer from low adoption because the name isn't catchy. Tim On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:28 AM, Les Hazlewood <[email protected]>wrote: > 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 > >> > > > > >
