Yes, naming is hard. We didn't go with linq with concerns about trademarks. We didn't go with groovy-sql. That might be kind of confusing. We currently don't support SQL - at least not in the way most people would expect in terms of the data you can query on.
>From memory, there was an informal discussion about naming on slack at the time but it looks like it never made it back to a mailing list - possibly just a PR/Jira issue at the time. Some other possibilities (though none spring out as clearly better than ginq to me just yet): groovy-quid (query integrated data - missing the reference to language - maybe confusable with JSR 354) groovy-link (how you pronounce linq - but might be confusing with jlink) groovy-liq (pronounced lick - just dropping the n from linq - doesn't have as good an association with existing recognition of LINQ) groovy-liquid (for fluent style queries but maybe too cute) groovy-liquidity (as above) groovy-gq (again repeating the g but matches the introducing "keyword") groovy-qing (queries integrated with groovy - would folks always mispell since it reverses the order of the more common linq) I don't mind MG's suggestion of groovy-q (it has a James Bond as well as Star Trek potential association and also Suzi Q[uatro] - but it's short and I'm unsure whether folks seeing it for the first time would make any useful association). Otherwise I agree with OC that whatever is chosen can be misconstrued by someone somewhere. Cheers, Paul On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 1:42 AM Milles, Eric (TR Technology) < eric.mil...@thomsonreuters.com> wrote: > Is there still time to reconsider the name of the new integrated query > module (groovy-ginq) before Groovy 4 is released and the choice is locked > in? I ask for a couple of reasons: > > 1) the "g" is redundant; groovy-ginq implies "groovy > groovy integrated query". When gcontracts was moved under apache, it was > changed to "groovy-contracts", not "groovy-gcontracts". > > 2) ginq is very close to an ethnic slur in american > english. > > > > I do realize that it was originally groovy-linq. I asked at that time if > that was a registered trademark of Microsoft. I did not hear whether or > not it was, just suddenly it was groovy-ginq without any further discussion. > > > > So I propose groovy-ginq be renamed to one of the following: > > groovy-query > > groovy-linq > > groovy-inq > > > > Or my proposal to incorporate it into the groovy-sql module could be > reconsidered. > > > This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient and contains > information that may be privileged and/or confidential. If you are not an > intended recipient, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete > this e-mail and any attachments. Certain required legal entity disclosures > can be accessed on our website: > https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en/resources/disclosures.html >
