On 8/7/06, Kim van der Riet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I have been somewhat surprised at the amount of debate surrounding the name of the proposed Glasgow project. It seems that this project has become entangled in an issue overdue for discussion within Apache. Perhaps the emotive issue of using (another) proper noun has sparked a much-needed debate.
+1
I have even been a little confused by the seemingly contradictory posts about resolving the naming of the project prior to acceptance vs. solving the issue prior to graduation.
IMHO there is no consensus about this issue and different people disagree about the right approach. maybe a consensus will emerge. maybe it will not.
Being new to the process of incubation and to Apache itself, I would very much appreciate some clarification of the following regarding Glasgow: Do we need to change our name now or after acceptance?
IMHO there is not a consensus on this issue it is possible that submitting a new proposal with a different name may result in some of those who voted against the proposal on the grounds of the name alone to change their minds. i can speak only for myself, though.
The project undertakes to abide by any policy or naming decision and make any necessary name changes. If need be, we could even open a separate thread, pre- or post-incubation-acceptance, for the purpose of finding an acceptable name, and invite all those who wish to do to to contribute.
that's probably the best way to go about finding a name
Some clear guidelines would be very helpful.
it's hard to be clear when i can't see clearly myself it's hard to give guidance when there is not a consensus. i can only give my opinions the only advice i can give is: keep doing what you're doing now: speak out, engage in the debate :-) - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
