On Aug 8, 2008, at 4:28 AM, James Dixson (jadixson) wrote:
Simple put: a name change is work. Before I can accept the need to do
work, I want to clearly understand the benefits of doing it.
Etch, while new to open-source, does have some awareness in a
technical
community ( http://developer.cisco.com/web/cuae ). We have been
publicly
pitching and distributing etch in our community for several months
now.
People have been using the technology and for our current community
Etch
!= Debian. Granted, a couple of months is a short amount of time,
but it
is something. Imposing a name change on our current community, with
the
reasoning that the future community, would be unable to differentiate
between "Apache Etch" and the etch release Debian, would be
disruptive.
I don't think the argument is necessarily that the future community
can't distinguish between Apache Etch and Debian, I think the argument
is that the future community won't be able to find it, period, which
means the future community may well be smaller than it would be w/ a
more distinctive name.
Put it this way, you search for Hadoop, the top 10 on Google is all
Apache Hadoop. You search for Etch and you will be lucky to crack the
top 10, me thinks, but who knows maybe you'll get enough rank to
displace the Etch-a-Sketch and it will be a non-issue.
Of course, the work thing I understand, too, although it seems like a
global search and replace wouldn't be that bad. You also certainly
could change it over time, even after being accepted into incubation,
I think, just as long as it's done before first release.
FWIW, I like the name Etch :-)
-Grant
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
