On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:29 PM, scott comer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > as a scientist, i am getting somewhat bristly at all the rumor, innuendo, > and hyperbole around names. i've not seen any definitive or measurable steps > that can be take to ensure success. we're also ignoring the silent majority > which seems to like etch just fine. my personal opinion is that the name is > not the gating factor for success. apache pig? really. success and web hits > will derive from being truly useful and trusted. it doesn't work the other > way around. > > simply dictionary word names and result counts on google certainly don't > count. several apache projects are named with dictionary words with > significantly larger search result counts than etch. > > to state the obvious, what counts is that people can find you. i've seen > studies and information on how to try to game google's system. many of them > contradict each other, but everyone can agree that you better be on the > first page and with something clearly definitive near the top of the first > screen. from their info, two things matter: > > 1) links from various "definitive" sources to the etch page. this can come > from links from reviews, cisco.com, java.sun.com, apache home page, > microsoft csharp page, python, ruby, wikipedia, about.com, etc. these things > are not present now, but will be shortly if we could get past this. > > 2) names must be memorable enough so that a casual reference in a > conversation can be turned into a successful search later. examples of this > might be "etch", "etch protocol", "etch java", etc. if you search for "etch > service description language" or "etch protocol" right now you get to the > right place. nothing is more off-putting than a name which you cannot spell > having only heard it. word combinations are also out for the same reason, > because people enter them as two separate words. finally, if your name is > intentionally misspelled, watch out. google will suggest a better spelling > and people often automatically take its advice. > > the important thing right now is, i think, that searching now for etch > doesn't not reveal anything which is obviously competing technology (east > tennessee children's hospital is #1, debian #2, etch a sketch #3). nothing > obviously confusing comes up. therefore, plenty of room for etch to elbow > its way to the #1 spot, esp when combined with other keywords. > > when choosing the name etch, we thought it important to choose a short word > which wasn't already a tech name. it needed to connote writing and > communication. it need to be easy to remember, etc. > > i really like the name etch, obviously, it is short and memorable and > mnemonic, i haven't seen anything which would indicate that a successful and > useful technology would not be adopted just because of its name. changing > the name now seems fussy and would muddy water enough to confuse the small > toe hold we already have (cio.com article, cisco video presentations, > existing cisco customers, etc.). it isn't worth it right now without > definitive proof that the new name is better. > > let's hear from the silent majority!
Theres nothing wrong with people suggesting/commenting/questioning names and its better to raise it now than later and I don't think its worth getting worked up about - there is something worse than feedback you don't like - complete indifference to a proposal. Having said that, unless there are valid objections to a name (and I don't see any for Etch) then it should be up to the podling community to decide what they call themselves. So I'm mostly +1 to what you said (just not the bristly bit!) Niall > scott out > > Grant Ingersoll wrote: >> >> 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]
