Carlos’ argument carries weight to me. If a new name will help motivate him in terms of marketing it, that’s value I can recognize.
The name is not as important to me as motivating people to be involved in the project. We can build whatever messages we want around the name. Carlos clearly feels more passionate about his position than I do about mine. A hesitation I have about picking a new name is that I don’t want to delay the board’s decision on the new PMC. If we go for a new name can we try and pick one quickly? Harbs > On Sep 13, 2017, at 9:20 PM, Carlos Rovira <carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> > wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm putting some efforts here since I think this is really important for > all of us and for our beloved FlexJS project. > > Name, website and all the visuals behind it matters....and is important in > a way many of us in this community maybe can't imagine. If we don't get a > fresh and compelling name and a clean and beautiful site where we explain > all the great things our technology can do, we are losing our time, since > this project will end with the bulk of the others xxxJS projects, and > that's even horrible when our tech could be used for things other than JS!! > (If we want in future years to make it possible). > > @Alex: I Think we can't have a PROJECT name != of PRODUCT name for the > reason you stated, people will end reaching "FlexJS" name and will > interpret that as a joke, so no, even naming inside the project (including > vars, functions and so on...) are part of what people ends liking or > hating. > > @Harbs, I said that I can put work on naming, website design and even host > the web, but for doing so I need to feel the name is the right one, and I'm > fearing that people is looking for a name that I don't think could give us > some opportunity to fight with the great ones, since React or Dart, seems > to me that has some sounding or power behind, but Beads, or Strand does not > mean anything outside our own understanding for what we know it means in > our architecture. But we should not decide a name based in that kind of > things since we will end having something that in the mainstream does not > has the needs to evocate a great and powerful technology to people out > there. > > I think the name change could involve at least two of us : > > - 1 to make changes in code (repos, git,etc... > - 1 to make more marketing things: logo, website, etc.. > > I offer my work for the second, my only condition is that I need to believe > in the final name we choose, and since we are a community, this must be > elected by all of us, and we could work in it in the same manner : if > people believe in it, people will work in it. I have clear that I will work > if the final community decision has a strong base and I can envision that > the effort will push the tech to a great place (or at least has options to > be fighting in the mainstream of actual techs like Angular, React, and > others) > > @Om, thanks, I think you like me and others I know that has live that > situation, knows perfectly how devaluated is the Flex name in actual > times, so is crucial for us to change it > > > > > > 2017-09-13 19:57 GMT+02:00 OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>: > >> On Sep 13, 2017 9:39 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> My main concern was with the JS suffix. If we can create new products >> without the JS suffix that’s fine with me. >> >> On the other hand, if Carlos or someone else feels passionate about a name >> change and volunteers to deal with the overhead I wouldn’t go against it. >> >> >> I agree with Carlos. Bringing in the word Flex-something into a >> conversation with peers is proving to be hard. >> >> If anything, a new name would bring a fresh perspective on this wonderful >> technology. >> >> I volunteer to help out with the branding as much as I can. >> >> Thanks, >> Om >> >> >> >> From: Alex Harui<mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 6:33 PM >> To: dev@flex.apache.org<mailto:dev@flex.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork >> >> Actually, my question was whether the PROJECT name is more or less >> important than the PRODUCT name. Mostly, the board/infra doesn't want us >> to change the PROJECT name. Infra replied that we can create PRODUCTs >> with names that do not match the PROJECT name. >> >> So, could we live with the PROJECT being called FlexJS forever? If we >> think we can target a different group of customers with a different >> PRODUCT name we can discuss what that name is later. Now AIUI, if we do >> stick with FlexJS as the PROJECT, and later decide to create a PRODUCT >> called Foo, I think somewhere on web pages for Foo it will link back >> eventually to our source repositories and other pages that have the >> PROJECT name "FlexJS" on it and people might go "Huh, I didn't know that >> Foo was based on FlexJS". But will they run away? >> >> I buy lots of foods with brand names that I have no idea who the actual >> manufacturer is. In the US, a fancy brand of cookies (Pepperidge Farm) is >> manufactured by the same company that makes cheap condensed soup >> (Campbells). A popular salad dressing is made by a well-known bleach >> company (Clorox). So, I agree with Carlos that it might be worth building >> a whole new brand without the word Flex in it, but I think the only >> question we need to answer right now is whether the PROJECT name "FlexJS" >> will be a hindrance to building that brand. >> >> Thoughts? >> -Alex >> >> On 9/13/17, 4:07 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Yes. If we might change the name after forming the new PMC, it’s a >>> concern. Alex’s question is more about the framework developing into >>> something else in the future. That’s something I don’t think we need to >>> be concerned about right now. >>> >>> I’d rather capitalize on the FlexJS name. >>> >>> Harbs >>> >>>> On Sep 13, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I thought that name things was one of the concerns in the thread from >>>> board. >>> >> > > > > -- > > <http://www.codeoscopic.com> > > Carlos Rovira > > Director General > > M: +34 607 22 60 05 > > http://www.codeoscopic.com > > http://www.avant2.es > > > Conocenos en 1 minuto! <https://youtu.be/P2IEAYDG5HU> > > > Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener > información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por > error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y > proceda a su destrucción. > > De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le comunicamos > que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC > S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del > servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso, > rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a nuestras > oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación > necesaria.
