On 10/27/06, Sami Siren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Marshall Schor wrote:
> The most popular way to pronounce UIMA is you-eee-muh.
>
> There is a fairly large user community using pre-Apache UIMA. The
> potential confusion about which UIMA people may be talking about may be
> mitigated somewhat by versioning. The pre-Apache releases are numbered
> 1.x.x; the Apache ones will be numbered as 2.x.x and higher. (We are
> showing a "beta" level of 2.x in pre-Apache form, but will transition
> users as rapidly as possible to the the Apache one, once we get set up
> and "going" in Apache).
>
> If we rename it, this might cause some confusion itself - it would
> appear that there were 2 different things, rather than one thing that
> was moving from its previous environment to Apache. I'm not sure what
> would be more confusing - having a new name, or having users understand
> that the project has moved to Apache.
I don't understand the problem here. Is UIMA going to be something
different when it moves to apache?
who knows?
most projects grow and evolve during incubation. some of this is
driven by apache, some is driven by the community themselves taking
the opportunity for reflection.
and why should users care where the project is hosted?
existing users may not but some new users may well do. in particular,
apache has a reputation for paying attention to legal issues and for
open development. organisations often approve the use of apache
products en mass.
If you ask me - Just keep the name.
the name will need to change anyway: it will need to be 'Apache XXX'
(for trademark reasons). so, the question (for the community) is
whether to move to Apache UIMA or something else.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
