Do we want to do the hard yards for JuiCE and contact the current users or the name?
There's only 2 that we could find. Sending an email to them can't seem to hurt. Give them a couple days to respond and we are set.
This issue seems very tricky. If they don't agree or if they don't respond, what then? Probably it won't be appropriate to go ahead with the name before we are sure. I know this would sound tough but why not hunt for the name again?
If they don't respond they don't care.. if they do respond I can't really believe they would have a huge problem with it. A mpg123 frontend is completely and absolutely different than a cryptographic library. Neither is also likely to be extremely popular and well-known. The other project hasn't released any code as of yet and I think doesn't have that many bragging rights.
If they have a big problem I guess we go find ourselves another name.
It will make a big difference if they come scream at us a couple years down the road.
As an aside - thoughts on the package name (see Noel's last question).
I have no problems with an org.apache.security package name.
Can we be sure about this? Do we know we won't have something like "org.apache.jce" or something else. Just some thoughts.
I think it makes sense to have a decent package structure with a common package.
So - org.apache.security.jce - org.apache.security.signature - org.apache.security.encryption
etc etc..
Erwin
