+1 I really like the name - MojoHaus -D
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:49 PM, Robert Scholte <codeh...@sourcegrounds.com> wrote: > +1 for MojoHaus > > Op Wed, 11 Mar 2015 12:06:34 +0100 schreef Brett Okken < > brett.okken...@gmail.com>: > > > +1 for MojoHaus >> On Mar 11, 2015 4:35 AM, "Stephen Connolly" <stephen.alan.connolly@gmail. >> com> >> wrote: >> >> On 11 March 2015 at 07:54, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> wrote: >>> >>> then we have a few proposals: >>>> - Mojo Extras >>>> - MojoHaus >>>> - The Mojo Project >>>> >>>> >>>> I really like MojoHaus >>>> >>>> >>> I am tempted to don my despot hat and decree MojoHaus the winner ;-) >>> >>> >>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Hervé >>>> >>>> Le mardi 10 mars 2015 09:28:59 vous avez écrit : >>>> > I think it's a bad idea to not include the "Mojo" name in some form. >>>> The >>>> > project has been around for over 10 years now and it widely known and >>>> used >>>> > in the Maven community. >>>> > >>>> > I think Mojo Extras is a good name, I would like to propose "The Mojo >>>> > Project". >>>> > > ok, another idea: Mojo Extras (I just reserved the github org) >>>> > > >>>> > > = Mojo (ie plugins for Maven) that can't be hosted at ASF for >>>> license >>>> > > issues, or generally less strict rules about anything (which comes >>>> at >>>> a >>>> > > price: this is not a foundation, no dev protection, or anything the >>>> rules >>>> > > are done for) >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > I'm not trying anything to replace Codehaus name itself, because >>>> Codehaus >>>> > > is really wide >>>> > > >>>> > > Regards, >>>> > > >>>> > > Hervé >>>> > > >>>> > > Le jeudi 5 mars 2015 15:51:03 vous avez écrit : >>>> > > > Hello Hervé, >>>> > > > >>>> > > > I would suggest that "mojo" is quite unknown for most developers >>>> (who >>>> > > > are >>>> > > > non-maven-plugin developers) out there. >>>> > > > Few would even contemplate calling the plugins by their full - or >>>> even >>>> > > > abbreviated - name. >>>> > > > Whenever I hear people talking about a plugin, they simply say >>>> "the >>>> > > > aspectj >>>> > > > plugin" or equivalent. >>>> > > > Not "the aspectj-maven-plugin" - and definitely not "Mojo's >>>> > > > aspectj-maven-plugin". >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Hence, I don't think that the Mojo "brand" is well-known at all >>>> > > > (actually, >>>> > > > it is more confusing since it can be mixed up with the name of the >>>> Mojo >>>> > > > interface and AbstractMojo implementation). >>>> > > > I don't even believe that the "Codehaus" brand is well-known to >>>> the >>>> > > > genereal development community. >>>> > > > If anything, the names of the plugins themselves *could* be known. >>>> > > > >>>> > > > So ... if we are going to refactor the Codehaus codebase and >>>> > > > organisation, >>>> > > > let's do it to best match the future demands. >>>> > > > >>>> > > > I would also suggest being *very* clear about presenting the >>>> reason >>>> that >>>> > > > the Codehaus/Mojo project develops Maven plugins instead of the >>>> projects >>>> > > > themselves. >>>> > > > For example - it would seem apparent that the AspectJ project >>>> should >>>> > > > develop an aspectj-maven-plugin. >>>> > > > However, that plugin is developed by Codehaus, and I believe that >>>> we >>>> > > > should >>>> > > > be a bit clearer in documenting why. >>>> > > > >>>> > > > Fair? >>>> > > > >>>> > > > 2015-03-05 9:24 GMT+01:00 Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr>: >>>> > > > > Le mercredi 4 mars 2015 14:16:08 vous avez écrit : >>>> > > > > > *Project name* >>>> > > > > > May not be a concern, but that needs to be cleared out sooner >>>> than >>>> > > > > > later. >>>> > > > > > I think that one of the most pressing subject may indeed not >>>> be >>>> > > > > > technical >>>> > > > > > but about the name of our project: what name should/could we >>>> use for >>>> > > > > > the >>>> > > > > > project. >>>> > > > > > >>>> > > > > > Should/could it stay "'Codehaus Mojo" on GitHub even after >>>> Codehaus >>>> > > > > > EOL >>>> > > > > > (meaning we'd certainly use https://github.com/codehaus-mojo >>>> org)? >>>> > > > > > or >>>> > > > > > "Maven Mojo" (which would make googling for it quite difficult >>>> btw)? >>>> > > > > > Or >>>> > > > > > change the project name even more? >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > -1 to "Maven Mojo": trademark concern on Maven (Apache Maven, to >>>> be >>>> > > > > precise) >>>> > > > > could be "Mojo for Maven" >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > why not just "Mojo" as the project name? >>>> > > > > AFAIK, it has become a well known name lately: is there really a >>>> need >>>> > > > > for >>>> > > > > "XXX >>>> > > > > Mojo", whatever XXX is? >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > Regards, >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > Hervé >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: >>>> > > > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email >>>> > > >>>> > > ------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> --------- >>>> > > >>>> > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: >>>> > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email >>>> > >>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: >>>> > >>>> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email >>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: >>>> >>>> http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > >
