You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@manifoldcf.apache.org by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> on 2010/09/29 00:40:02 UTC
[VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
Connex, if that wins its vote.
This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
suitability of the name in a legal context.
Karl
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
I let the vote remain open to this evening. I tried to post to that
effect but it didn't make it through for some reason.
Anyway, vote is now closed. I'll post the results under a separate subject.
Karl
On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Jack Krupansky
<ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> Karl, I've lost track of time. Did the simple up/down vote on ManifoldCF
> expire at 5:00 PM ET?
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:10 PM
> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>
>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>
>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>
>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>
>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> - Mark
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
Karl, I've lost track of time. Did the simple up/down vote on ManifoldCF
expire at 5:00 PM ET?
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:10 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>
>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>
>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>
>> Karl
>
>
> +1
>
> - Mark
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>
> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>
> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>
> Karl
+1
- Mark
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
The rules were for submissions, not for the vote itself. The
submissions were gathered in part, and the rules were set, as a
reaction to ManifoldCF itself. It's therefore perfectly valid that
ManifoldCF remained on the voting list. So deciding on ManifoldCF
seems an appropriate step. If you feel aggrieved, we could vote on
Manicon as well.
Karl
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:15 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You are correct about the rules. I added that name back in when we
> replaced the original vote for it with the name gathering exercise and
> then a vote, and I did not make it clear what I was doing. But then
> we still have to hold a vote on ManifoldCF, since that vote was
> aborted, and Grant did propose it as a name.
>
> Let me think about the proper way to handle this...
> Karl
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky
> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than any
>> of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use "MCF" as
>> the shorthand name.
>>
>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
>> selection rule #5:
>>
>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>
>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>
>> That's five syllables.
>>
>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit of
>> rule #1:
>>
>> (1) It's a single word
>>
>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>
>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>
>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> Jack,
>>>
>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>
>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>>> good choice.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>
>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really re-vote
>>>> for
>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>
>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>
>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
You are correct about the rules. I added that name back in when we
replaced the original vote for it with the name gathering exercise and
then a vote, and I did not make it clear what I was doing. But then
we still have to hold a vote on ManifoldCF, since that vote was
aborted, and Grant did propose it as a name.
Let me think about the proper way to handle this...
Karl
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky
<ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than any
> of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use "MCF" as
> the shorthand name.
>
> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
> selection rule #5:
>
> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>
> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>
> That's five syllables.
>
> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit of
> rule #1:
>
> (1) It's a single word
>
> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>
> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>
> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>
>> Jack,
>>
>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>
>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>> good choice.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>
>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really re-vote
>>> for
>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>
>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>
>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>
>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
That is roughly the usage I would expect. As far as a book title, tough
call. There is the length issue. If somebody already knows of ManifoldCF,
"Apache ManifoldCF in Action" makes sense, but "Apache Manifold Connectors
Framework in Action" is a bit more descriptive.
Bottom line, a name with three basic, core variations: "ManifoldCF", "MCF",
"Manifold Connectors Framework".
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 8:04 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following ways:
>
> Abbreviation: "MCF"
> Short name: "ManifoldCF"
> Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
> Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
> Connectors Framework"
>
> I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
> it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
> abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
> "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
> need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
> Action".
>
> Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be used?
>
> Karl
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually use
>> it
>> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go along
>> with the majority.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from
>>> me.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having
>>>>> this
>>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
>>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to
>>>>> use
>>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
>>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>>
>>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>>
>>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>>
>>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>>
>>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
>>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
>>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the
>>>>> spirit
>>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>>
>>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
>>>> This is no argument.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>>
>>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>>
>>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
>>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
>>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>
>>>>>> Jack,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>>>>>> good choice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to
>>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product.
>>>>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache
>>>>>>>>> label
>>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this
>>>>>>>>> vote
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
I'm with you Karl.
+1
- Mark
On 9/29/10 11:08 AM, Karl Wright wrote:
> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two months now?
>
> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
> ranked in order.
>
> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>> syllable rule :-)
>>
>> How about Manifole?
>>
>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you,
>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at
>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>
>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>
>> Upayavira
>>
>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>
>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>
>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following ways:
>>>>
>>>> Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>>> Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>>> Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>>> Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>>> Connectors Framework"
>>>>
>>>> I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
>>>> it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>>> abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>>> "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
>>>> need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>>> Action".
>>>>
>>>> Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be used?
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually use it
>>>>> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go along
>>>>> with the majority.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from
>>>>>> me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
>>>>>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
>>>>>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use
>>>>>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
>>>>>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
>>>>>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
>>>>>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit
>>>>>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
>>>>>>> This is no argument.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
>>>>>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
>>>>>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>>>>>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jack,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>>>>>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>>>>>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>>>>>>>>> good choice.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>>>>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to
>>>>>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>>>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>>>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
Just for the record, it never occurred to me that the concept of what a
"single word" is was so subjective. To me a single word implies a simple,
non-compound term, a sequence of letters, all nominally lower case and the
first of which is upper-cased to make the word a proper name. If I had known
that the original rule was to be interpreted differently, I would have
objected before we gathered the list. Besides, I was simply trying to model
names based on the "style" used by many existing Apache project names.
Again, that is just for the record and I'll go along with whatever the rest
of the community decides. I sympathize with those who are exasperated with
the process, but, as I would put it, "Democracy progresses through
exhaustion." I'll be patient, and if Karl wants to push forward, that's fine
with me.
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two months
> now?
>
> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
> ranked in order.
>
> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>> syllable rule :-)
>>
>> How about Manifole?
>>
>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you,
>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at
>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>
>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>
>> Upayavira
>>
>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>
>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>
>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following
>>> > ways:
>>> >
>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>> > Connectors Framework"
>>> >
>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>> > Action".
>>> >
>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be
>>> > used?
>>> >
>>> > Karl
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually
>>> >> use it
>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go
>>> >> along
>>> >> with the majority.
>>> >>
>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>>> >>
>>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>> >>
>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1
>>> >>> from
>>> >>> me.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Karl
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but
>>> >>>>> having this
>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical
>>> >>>>> than
>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having
>>> >>>>> to use
>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF"
>>> >>>>> violates
>>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having
>>> >>>> too
>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted
>>> >>>> name -
>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the
>>> >>>>> spirit
>>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to
>>> >>>> ignore.
>>> >>>> This is no argument.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping
>>> >>>> the
>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so
>>> >>>> sick of
>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Jack,
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices
>>> >>>>>> by
>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides
>>> >>>>>> that
>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish
>>> >>>>>> a
>>> >>>>>> good choice.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Karl
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or
>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product.
>>> >>>>>>>>> However,
>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache
>>> >>>>>>>>> label
>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this
>>> >>>>>>>>> vote
>>> >>>>>>>>> is
>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
That's fine. I was just thinking that since the community was so small,
getting a higher participation would be helpful. [Of course, settling on a
name and ending all of this voting would be even more helpful.]
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 5:04 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> That's really too high a bar. This community is still small. These types
> of procedural votes are majority votes. 3 days is always given to give
> plenty of time to vote.
>
> If you insist, I don't see why we can't keep the vote open for another
> day or two, but I don't think it makes much sense to add some random
> minimum number of votes needed. It doesn't really jive with how Apache
> communities have worked in the past IMO.
>
> The 3 days takes into account waiting a good amount of time for a vote -
> adding a couple/few days, fine - but -1 to some kind of minimum voices
> needed.
>
> How many people are actually active on this project currently? 1.75? And
> you want 8 votes? We are lucky to have drawn in the bystanders votes we
> have.
>
> - Mark
>
> On 9/29/10 4:56 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>> Can we stick with a 8-person minimum quorum for this and most other
>> votes? In other words the vote closes at the deadline if there is a
>> quorum, other it stays open until 5 p.m. after there is a quorum.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:38 PM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> <= 0 means failure.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>> Ah, okay, that's cool. So if the vote fails (<= 0 or < 0?), we would
>>>> then
>>>> vote on the next choice, which is... "Manicon".
>>>>
>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:01 PM
>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>
>>>>> We're trying for an up/down confirmation of ManifoldCF as a new name
>>>>> for the project. If it succeeds, that's our name. If it fails, it's
>>>>> on to the next-highest-ranking choice. Right now score is 0.
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My apologies for not vetting connex properly. I actually do recall
>>>>>> seeing
>>>>>> the sourceforge project project now when reminded of it, but I was
>>>>>> working
>>>>>> too quickly and didn't get around to editing my list right away and
>>>>>> forgot
>>>>>> about it. And I assumed that Karl was going to vet names "properly"
>>>>>> anyway.
>>>>>> So... it's my fault that "manicon" wasn't there as the top choice
>>>>>> when
>>>>>> people voted!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In any case, I think I have lost track of where we were in the
>>>>>> process...
>>>>>> voting +1/-1 on keeping ManifoldCF vs. staying with Apache Connectors
>>>>>> Framework, I think? And with other Karl and I voting on that so far
>>>>>> (+1
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> -1)? I'll let Karl send out a proper reminder of wherever he says
>>>>>> we are.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM
>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two
>>>>>>> months
>>>>>>> now?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
>>>>>>> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
>>>>>>> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but
>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
>>>>>>> ranked in order.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
>>>>>>> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
>>>>>>> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply
>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>>>>>>>> syllable rule :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How about Manifole?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion
>>>>>>>> going, I
>>>>>>>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community
>>>>>>>> behind you,
>>>>>>>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote
>>>>>>>> - at
>>>>>>>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Upayavira
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda
>>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>>>>>>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>>>>>>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the
>>>>>>>>> following > >
>>>>>>>>> > ways:
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>>>>>>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>>>>>>>> > Connectors Framework"
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last
>>>>>>>>> usage, >
>>>>>>>>> > since
>>>>>>>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>>>>>>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>>>>>>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would >
>>>>>>>>> probably
>>>>>>>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>>>>>>>> > Action".
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title
>>>>>>>>> should > be
>>>>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>>>>> > used?
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Karl
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to >>
>>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>>> >> >> use it
>>>>>>>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll
>>>>>>>>> certainly >> go
>>>>>>>>> >> >> along
>>>>>>>>> >> with the majority.
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>>>>>>>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>
>>>>>>>>> >> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this
>>>>>>>>> >>> point.
>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> +1
>>>>>>>>> >>> >>> from
>>>>>>>>> >>> me.
>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>> >>> Karl
>>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller >>>
>>>>>>>>> >>> <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> having this
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> practical
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> than
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> having
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> to use
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> "ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> violates
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> having
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> too
>>>>>>>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most
>>>>>>>>> >>>> voted
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> name -
>>>>>>>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these
>>>>>>>>> votes).
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half
>>>>>>>>> violates >>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> spirit
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is
>>>>>>>>> going to
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> ignore.
>>>>>>>>> >>>> This is no argument.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>> topping
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>>>>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us
>>>>>>>>> are so
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> sick of
>>>>>>>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will
>>>>>>>>> >>>> be
>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Jack,
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> choices
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can
>>>>>>>>> use.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> decides
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> furnish
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> good choice.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> nothing?
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors
>>>>>>>>> Framework, >>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> product.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> label
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> vote
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also
>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
That's really too high a bar. This community is still small. These types
of procedural votes are majority votes. 3 days is always given to give
plenty of time to vote.
If you insist, I don't see why we can't keep the vote open for another
day or two, but I don't think it makes much sense to add some random
minimum number of votes needed. It doesn't really jive with how Apache
communities have worked in the past IMO.
The 3 days takes into account waiting a good amount of time for a vote -
adding a couple/few days, fine - but -1 to some kind of minimum voices
needed.
How many people are actually active on this project currently? 1.75? And
you want 8 votes? We are lucky to have drawn in the bystanders votes we
have.
- Mark
On 9/29/10 4:56 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
> Can we stick with a 8-person minimum quorum for this and most other
> votes? In other words the vote closes at the deadline if there is a
> quorum, other it stays open until 5 p.m. after there is a quorum.
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:38 PM
> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>
>> <= 0 means failure.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Jack Krupansky
>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>> Ah, okay, that's cool. So if the vote fails (<= 0 or < 0?), we would
>>> then
>>> vote on the next choice, which is... "Manicon".
>>>
>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:01 PM
>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>
>>>> We're trying for an up/down confirmation of ManifoldCF as a new name
>>>> for the project. If it succeeds, that's our name. If it fails, it's
>>>> on to the next-highest-ranking choice. Right now score is 0.
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jack Krupansky
>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> My apologies for not vetting connex properly. I actually do recall
>>>>> seeing
>>>>> the sourceforge project project now when reminded of it, but I was
>>>>> working
>>>>> too quickly and didn't get around to editing my list right away and
>>>>> forgot
>>>>> about it. And I assumed that Karl was going to vet names "properly"
>>>>> anyway.
>>>>> So... it's my fault that "manicon" wasn't there as the top choice when
>>>>> people voted!
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case, I think I have lost track of where we were in the
>>>>> process...
>>>>> voting +1/-1 on keeping ManifoldCF vs. staying with Apache Connectors
>>>>> Framework, I think? And with other Karl and I voting on that so far
>>>>> (+1
>>>>> and
>>>>> -1)? I'll let Karl send out a proper reminder of wherever he says
>>>>> we are.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM
>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>
>>>>>> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two
>>>>>> months
>>>>>> now?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
>>>>>> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
>>>>>> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
>>>>>> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
>>>>>> ranked in order.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
>>>>>> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
>>>>>> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
>>>>>> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
>>>>>> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>>>>>>> syllable rule :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How about Manifole?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion
>>>>>>> going, I
>>>>>>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community
>>>>>>> behind you,
>>>>>>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote
>>>>>>> - at
>>>>>>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
>>>>>>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Upayavira
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda
>>>>>>>> like
>>>>>>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>>>>>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>>>>>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the
>>>>>>>> following > >
>>>>>>>> > ways:
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>>>>>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>>>>>>> > Connectors Framework"
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last
>>>>>>>> usage, >
>>>>>>>> > since
>>>>>>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>>>>>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>>>>>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would >
>>>>>>>> probably
>>>>>>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>>>>>>> > Action".
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title
>>>>>>>> should > be
>>>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>>>> > used?
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Karl
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to >>
>>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>>> >> >> use it
>>>>>>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll
>>>>>>>> certainly >> go
>>>>>>>> >> >> along
>>>>>>>> >> with the majority.
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>>>>>>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>
>>>>>>>> >> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point.
>>>>>>>> >>> >>> +1
>>>>>>>> >>> >>> from
>>>>>>>> >>> me.
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> Karl
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but
>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> having this
>>>>>>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> practical
>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> than
>>>>>>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up
>>>>>>>> >>>>> having
>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> to use
>>>>>>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> violates
>>>>>>>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> having
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> too
>>>>>>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> name -
>>>>>>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these
>>>>>>>> votes).
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half
>>>>>>>> violates >>>>> the
>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> spirit
>>>>>>>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is
>>>>>>>> going to
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> ignore.
>>>>>>>> >>>> This is no argument.
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> topping
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>>>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us
>>>>>>>> are so
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> sick of
>>>>>>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be
>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>>>>>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Jack,
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> choices
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> by
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can
>>>>>>>> use.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> decides
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> that
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> furnish
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> good choice.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> really
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> nothing?
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors
>>>>>>>> Framework, >>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> product.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> label
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> vote
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also
>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
Can we stick with a 8-person minimum quorum for this and most other votes?
In other words the vote closes at the deadline if there is a quorum, other
it stays open until 5 p.m. after there is a quorum.
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 1:38 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> <= 0 means failure.
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Jack Krupansky
> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> Ah, okay, that's cool. So if the vote fails (<= 0 or < 0?), we would then
>> vote on the next choice, which is... "Manicon".
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:01 PM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> We're trying for an up/down confirmation of ManifoldCF as a new name
>>> for the project. If it succeeds, that's our name. If it fails, it's
>>> on to the next-highest-ranking choice. Right now score is 0.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jack Krupansky
>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> My apologies for not vetting connex properly. I actually do recall
>>>> seeing
>>>> the sourceforge project project now when reminded of it, but I was
>>>> working
>>>> too quickly and didn't get around to editing my list right away and
>>>> forgot
>>>> about it. And I assumed that Karl was going to vet names "properly"
>>>> anyway.
>>>> So... it's my fault that "manicon" wasn't there as the top choice when
>>>> people voted!
>>>>
>>>> In any case, I think I have lost track of where we were in the
>>>> process...
>>>> voting +1/-1 on keeping ManifoldCF vs. staying with Apache Connectors
>>>> Framework, I think? And with other Karl and I voting on that so far (+1
>>>> and
>>>> -1)? I'll let Karl send out a proper reminder of wherever he says we
>>>> are.
>>>>
>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM
>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>
>>>>> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two
>>>>> months
>>>>> now?
>>>>>
>>>>> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
>>>>> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
>>>>> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
>>>>> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
>>>>> ranked in order.
>>>>>
>>>>> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
>>>>> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
>>>>> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
>>>>> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
>>>>> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>>>>>> syllable rule :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How about Manifole?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
>>>>>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind
>>>>>> you,
>>>>>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote -
>>>>>> at
>>>>>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
>>>>>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Upayavira
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
>>>>>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>>>>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>>>>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following
>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>> > ways:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>>>>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>>>>>> > Connectors Framework"
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, >
>>>>>>> > since
>>>>>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>>>>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>>>>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would
>>>>>>> > probably
>>>>>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>>>>>> > Action".
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should
>>>>>>> > be
>>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>>> > used?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Karl
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to
>>>>>>> >> actually
>>>>>>> >> >> use it
>>>>>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly
>>>>>>> >> go
>>>>>>> >> >> along
>>>>>>> >> with the majority.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>>>>>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>
>>>>>>> >> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point.
>>>>>>> >>> >>> +1
>>>>>>> >>> >>> from
>>>>>>> >>> me.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Karl
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller >>>
>>>>>>> >>> <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but
>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> having this
>>>>>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> practical
>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> than
>>>>>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up
>>>>>>> >>>>> having
>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> to use
>>>>>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF"
>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> violates
>>>>>>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that
>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> having
>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> too
>>>>>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted
>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> name -
>>>>>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates
>>>>>>> >>>>> the
>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> spirit
>>>>>>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to
>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> ignore.
>>>>>>> >>>> This is no argument.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop
>>>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> topping
>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so
>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> sick of
>>>>>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be
>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>>>>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Jack,
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list
>>>>>>> >>>>>> choices
>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> by
>>>>>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community
>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> decides
>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> that
>>>>>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to
>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> furnish
>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> a
>>>>>>> >>>>>> good choice.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> really
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> nothing?
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework,
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> product.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> label
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> vote
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
<= 0 means failure.
Karl
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 12:09 PM, Jack Krupansky
<ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> Ah, okay, that's cool. So if the vote fails (<= 0 or < 0?), we would then
> vote on the next choice, which is... "Manicon".
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:01 PM
> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>
>> We're trying for an up/down confirmation of ManifoldCF as a new name
>> for the project. If it succeeds, that's our name. If it fails, it's
>> on to the next-highest-ranking choice. Right now score is 0.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jack Krupansky
>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> My apologies for not vetting connex properly. I actually do recall seeing
>>> the sourceforge project project now when reminded of it, but I was
>>> working
>>> too quickly and didn't get around to editing my list right away and
>>> forgot
>>> about it. And I assumed that Karl was going to vet names "properly"
>>> anyway.
>>> So... it's my fault that "manicon" wasn't there as the top choice when
>>> people voted!
>>>
>>> In any case, I think I have lost track of where we were in the process...
>>> voting +1/-1 on keeping ManifoldCF vs. staying with Apache Connectors
>>> Framework, I think? And with other Karl and I voting on that so far (+1
>>> and
>>> -1)? I'll let Karl send out a proper reminder of wherever he says we are.
>>>
>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM
>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>
>>>> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two
>>>> months
>>>> now?
>>>>
>>>> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
>>>> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
>>>> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
>>>> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
>>>> ranked in order.
>>>>
>>>> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
>>>> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
>>>> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
>>>> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
>>>> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>>>>> syllable rule :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> How about Manifole?
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
>>>>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you,
>>>>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at
>>>>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>>>>
>>>>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
>>>>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>>>>
>>>>> Upayavira
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
>>>>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>>>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>>>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following >
>>>>>> > ways:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>>>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>>>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>>>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>>>>> > Connectors Framework"
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, >
>>>>>> > since
>>>>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>>>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>>>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
>>>>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>>>>> > Action".
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be
>>>>>> > > >
>>>>>> > used?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Karl
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually
>>>>>> >> >> use it
>>>>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go
>>>>>> >> >> along
>>>>>> >> with the majority.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>>>>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>
>>>>>> >> ManifoldCF
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point.
>>>>>> >>> >>> +1
>>>>>> >>> >>> from
>>>>>> >>> me.
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Karl
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller >>>
>>>>>> >>> <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but
>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> having this
>>>>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> practical
>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> than
>>>>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having
>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> to use
>>>>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF"
>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> violates
>>>>>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> having
>>>>>> >>>> >>>> too
>>>>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted
>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> name -
>>>>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the
>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> spirit
>>>>>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to
>>>>>> >>>> >>>> ignore.
>>>>>> >>>> This is no argument.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> topping
>>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so
>>>>>> >>>> >>>> sick of
>>>>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be
>>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>>>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Jack,
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices
>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> by
>>>>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community
>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> decides
>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> that
>>>>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to
>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> furnish
>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> a
>>>>>> >>>>>> good choice.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Karl
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should
>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> really
>>>>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> nothing?
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However,
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> label
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> vote
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
Ah, okay, that's cool. So if the vote fails (<= 0 or < 0?), we would then
vote on the next choice, which is... "Manicon".
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 12:01 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> We're trying for an up/down confirmation of ManifoldCF as a new name
> for the project. If it succeeds, that's our name. If it fails, it's
> on to the next-highest-ranking choice. Right now score is 0.
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jack Krupansky
> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> My apologies for not vetting connex properly. I actually do recall seeing
>> the sourceforge project project now when reminded of it, but I was
>> working
>> too quickly and didn't get around to editing my list right away and
>> forgot
>> about it. And I assumed that Karl was going to vet names "properly"
>> anyway.
>> So... it's my fault that "manicon" wasn't there as the top choice when
>> people voted!
>>
>> In any case, I think I have lost track of where we were in the process...
>> voting +1/-1 on keeping ManifoldCF vs. staying with Apache Connectors
>> Framework, I think? And with other Karl and I voting on that so far (+1
>> and
>> -1)? I'll let Karl send out a proper reminder of wherever he says we are.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two
>>> months
>>> now?
>>>
>>> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
>>> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
>>> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
>>> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
>>> ranked in order.
>>>
>>> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
>>> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
>>> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
>>> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
>>> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>>>> syllable rule :-)
>>>>
>>>> How about Manifole?
>>>>
>>>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
>>>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you,
>>>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at
>>>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>>>
>>>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
>>>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>>>
>>>> Upayavira
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
>>>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following >
>>>>> > ways:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>>>> > Connectors Framework"
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage,
>>>>> > since
>>>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
>>>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>>>> > Action".
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > used?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Karl
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually
>>>>> >> >> use it
>>>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go
>>>>> >> >> along
>>>>> >> with the majority.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>>>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>> >> ManifoldCF
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point.
>>>>> >>> +1
>>>>> >>> >>> from
>>>>> >>> me.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Karl
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller
>>>>> >>> <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but
>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> having this
>>>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less
>>>>> >>>>> practical
>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> than
>>>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having
>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> to use
>>>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF"
>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> violates
>>>>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that
>>>>> >>>> having
>>>>> >>>> >>>> too
>>>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted
>>>>> >>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> name -
>>>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the
>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> spirit
>>>>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to
>>>>> >>>> >>>> ignore.
>>>>> >>>> This is no argument.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop
>>>>> >>>> topping
>>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so
>>>>> >>>> >>>> sick of
>>>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be
>>>>> >>>> the
>>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Jack,
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> by
>>>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community
>>>>> >>>>>> decides
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> that
>>>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to
>>>>> >>>>>> furnish
>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> a
>>>>> >>>>>> good choice.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Karl
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should
>>>>> >>>>>>> really
>>>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it
>>>>> >>>>>>>> nothing?
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product.
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However,
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> label
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> vote
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> is
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
We're trying for an up/down confirmation of ManifoldCF as a new name
for the project. If it succeeds, that's our name. If it fails, it's
on to the next-highest-ranking choice. Right now score is 0.
Karl
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Jack Krupansky
<ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> My apologies for not vetting connex properly. I actually do recall seeing
> the sourceforge project project now when reminded of it, but I was working
> too quickly and didn't get around to editing my list right away and forgot
> about it. And I assumed that Karl was going to vet names "properly" anyway.
> So... it's my fault that "manicon" wasn't there as the top choice when
> people voted!
>
> In any case, I think I have lost track of where we were in the process...
> voting +1/-1 on keeping ManifoldCF vs. staying with Apache Connectors
> Framework, I think? And with other Karl and I voting on that so far (+1 and
> -1)? I'll let Karl send out a proper reminder of wherever he says we are.
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM
> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>
>> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two months
>> now?
>>
>> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
>> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
>> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
>> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
>> ranked in order.
>>
>> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
>> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
>> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
>> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
>> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>>> syllable rule :-)
>>>
>>> How about Manifole?
>>>
>>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
>>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you,
>>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at
>>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>>
>>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
>>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>>
>>> Upayavira
>>>
>>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
>>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>>
>>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following >
>>>> > ways:
>>>> >
>>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>>> > Connectors Framework"
>>>> >
>>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
>>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
>>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>>> > Action".
>>>> >
>>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be >
>>>> > used?
>>>> >
>>>> > Karl
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually
>>>> >> >> use it
>>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go
>>>> >> >> along
>>>> >> with the majority.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1
>>>> >>> >>> from
>>>> >>> me.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Karl
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> having this
>>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical
>>>> >>>>> >>>>> than
>>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having
>>>> >>>>> >>>>> to use
>>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF"
>>>> >>>>> >>>>> violates
>>>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having
>>>> >>>> >>>> too
>>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted >>>>
>>>> >>>> name -
>>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the
>>>> >>>>> >>>>> spirit
>>>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to
>>>> >>>> >>>> ignore.
>>>> >>>> This is no argument.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping
>>>> >>>> >>>> the
>>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so
>>>> >>>> >>>> sick of
>>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Jack,
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices
>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> by
>>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides
>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> that
>>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish
>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> a
>>>> >>>>>> good choice.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Karl
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or
>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product.
>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However,
>>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache
>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> label
>>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this
>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> vote
>>>> >>>>>>>>> is
>>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
My apologies for not vetting connex properly. I actually do recall seeing
the sourceforge project project now when reminded of it, but I was working
too quickly and didn't get around to editing my list right away and forgot
about it. And I assumed that Karl was going to vet names "properly" anyway.
So... it's my fault that "manicon" wasn't there as the top choice when
people voted!
In any case, I think I have lost track of where we were in the process...
voting +1/-1 on keeping ManifoldCF vs. staying with Apache Connectors
Framework, I think? And with other Karl and I voting on that so far (+1
and -1)? I'll let Karl send out a proper reminder of wherever he says we
are.
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 11:08 AM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two months
> now?
>
> We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
> 35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
> best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
> still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
> ranked in order.
>
> Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
> thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
> followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
> third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
> broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
>> syllable rule :-)
>>
>> How about Manifole?
>>
>> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
>> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you,
>> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at
>> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>>
>> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
>> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>>
>> Upayavira
>>
>> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>>
>> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
>>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>>
>>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following
>>> > ways:
>>> >
>>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>>> > Connectors Framework"
>>> >
>>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
>>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
>>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>>> > Action".
>>> >
>>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be
>>> > used?
>>> >
>>> > Karl
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually
>>> >> use it
>>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go
>>> >> along
>>> >> with the majority.
>>> >>
>>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>>> >>
>>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>> >>
>>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1
>>> >>> from
>>> >>> me.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Karl
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but
>>> >>>>> having this
>>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical
>>> >>>>> than
>>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having
>>> >>>>> to use
>>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF"
>>> >>>>> violates
>>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having
>>> >>>> too
>>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted
>>> >>>> name -
>>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the
>>> >>>>> spirit
>>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to
>>> >>>> ignore.
>>> >>>> This is no argument.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping
>>> >>>> the
>>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so
>>> >>>> sick of
>>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>> >>>>> ManifoldCF
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Jack,
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices
>>> >>>>>> by
>>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides
>>> >>>>>> that
>>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish
>>> >>>>>> a
>>> >>>>>> good choice.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Karl
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to
>>> >>>>>>> ManifoldCF
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache
>>> >>>>>>>>> ManifoldCF.
>>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or
>>> >>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product.
>>> >>>>>>>>> However,
>>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache
>>> >>>>>>>>> label
>>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this
>>> >>>>>>>>> vote
>>> >>>>>>>>> is
>>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
May I point out that we've been discussing this issue for over two months now?
We just went through a process of gathering names, came up with some
35 candidates, and voted to rank them. This process just ended, our
best candidate turned out to not have been submitted properly, but we
still have some 15 other names that people legitimately selected,
ranked in order.
Prior to that, we did a previous round where we did EXACTLY the same
thing, and Apache Connectors Framework was the winning selection,
followed by ManifoldCF. It sounds now like you are looking for yet a
third round? Unless you claim that the candidate list was simply not
broad enough, I can see no hope of gain by doing that.
Karl
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
> Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
> syllable rule :-)
>
> How about Manifole?
>
> I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
> suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you,
> and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at
> which point the vote is a mere formality.
>
> Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
> going to stay with us all for a long time!
>
> Upayavira
>
> [1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
>
> On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
>> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
>> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
>> choices I've offered myself here.
>>
>> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
>> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following ways:
>> >
>> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
>> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
>> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
>> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
>> > Connectors Framework"
>> >
>> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
>> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
>> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
>> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
>> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
>> > Action".
>> >
>> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be used?
>> >
>> > Karl
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
>> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually use it
>> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go along
>> >> with the majority.
>> >>
>> >> -- Jack Krupansky
>> >>
>> >> --------------------------------------------------
>> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>> >>
>> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from
>> >>> me.
>> >>>
>> >>> Karl
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
>> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
>> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use
>> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
>> >>>>> selection rule #5:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> That's five syllables.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
>> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
>> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit
>> >>>>> of rule #1:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
>> >>>> This is no argument.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
>> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
>> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Jack,
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>> >>>>>> good choice.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Karl
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>> >>>>>>> re-vote for
>> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to
>> >>>>>>>>> retain
>> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote
>> >>>>>>>>> is
>> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Karl
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >
>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Upayavira <uv...@odoko.co.uk>.
Some while back I suggested manifolio. But that breaches the four
syllable rule :-)
How about Manifole?
I'd say rather than bursting into votes, keep the discussion going, I
suspect you'll know when you've got enough of the community behind you,
and when it is then worth wrapping the whole thing up with a vote - at
which point the vote is a mere formality.
Worth giving it the effort now, see this recent post [1] - a name is
going to stay with us all for a long time!
Upayavira
[1] http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2010/09/first-time-right
On Tue, 2010-09-28 at 20:08 -0400, Karl Wright wrote:
> Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
> that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
> choices I've offered myself here.
>
> Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
> describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
>
> Karl
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following ways:
> >
> > Abbreviation: "MCF"
> > Short name: "ManifoldCF"
> > Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
> > Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
> > Connectors Framework"
> >
> > I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
> > it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
> > abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
> > "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
> > need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
> > Action".
> >
> > Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be used?
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
> > <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> >> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually use it
> >> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go along
> >> with the majority.
> >>
> >> -- Jack Krupansky
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------
> >> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
> >> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> >>
> >>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from
> >>> me.
> >>>
> >>> Karl
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
> >>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
> >>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use
> >>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
> >>>>> selection rule #5:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's five syllables.
> >>>>
> >>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
> >>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
> >>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit
> >>>>> of rule #1:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (1) It's a single word
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
> >>>>
> >>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
> >>>> This is no argument.
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
> >>>>
> >>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
> >>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
> >>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
> >>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------
> >>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
> >>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Jack,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
> >>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
> >>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
> >>>>>> good choice.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Karl
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
> >>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
> >>>>>>> re-vote for
> >>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
> >>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
> >>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to
> >>>>>>>>> retain
> >>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
> >>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote
> >>>>>>>>> is
> >>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
> >>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Karl
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
Actually, an abbreviation of "AMCF" is not bad either.... kinda like
that myself. But I'm still not sure I like any of the book title
choices I've offered myself here.
Do we dare use "Manifold Connectors Framework in Action"? and
describe AMCF as "Manifold Connectors Framework" at times?
Karl
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following ways:
>
> Abbreviation: "MCF"
> Short name: "ManifoldCF"
> Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
> Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
> Connectors Framework"
>
> I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
> it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
> abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
> "Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
> need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
> Action".
>
> Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be used?
>
> Karl
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually use it
>> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go along
>> with the majority.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from
>>> me.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
>>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
>>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use
>>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>>
>>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
>>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>>
>>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>>
>>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>>
>>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>>
>>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
>>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
>>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit
>>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>>
>>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>>
>>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
>>>> This is no argument.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>>
>>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>>
>>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
>>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
>>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>
>>>>>> Jack,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>>>>>> good choice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to
>>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote
>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
If this is adopted, I'm thinking we could use it in the following ways:
Abbreviation: "MCF"
Short name: "ManifoldCF"
Qualified short name: "Apache ManifoldCF"
Fully qualified and unabbreviated name: "the Apache Manifold
Connectors Framework"
I'm not quite sure what the world will think of that last usage, since
it does not contain the trademark. Then again, neither does the
abbreviation. But I'm not sure I'd dare make the book title be
"Apache Manifold Connectors Framework in Action". It would probably
need to be "Apache ManifoldCF in Action", or just "ManifoldCF in
Action".
Grant, you wrote a book. What do you think? Which title should be used?
Karl
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jack Krupansky
<ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> -1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually use it
> is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go along
> with the majority.
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>
>> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from
>> me.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
>>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
>>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use
>>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>>
>>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
>>>> selection rule #5:
>>>>
>>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>>
>>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>>
>>>> That's five syllables.
>>>
>>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
>>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
>>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>>
>>>>
>>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit
>>>> of rule #1:
>>>>
>>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>>
>>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>>
>>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
>>> This is no argument.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>>
>>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>>
>>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
>>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
>>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>
>>>>> Jack,
>>>>>
>>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>>>>> good choice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to
>>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
-1 for me. Standing alone it's an okay name, but trying to actually use it
is a pain (and we might as well call it MCF). But I'll certainly go along
with the majority.
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 7:25 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from
> me.
>
> Karl
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
>>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
>>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use
>>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>>
>>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
>>> selection rule #5:
>>>
>>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>>
>>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>>
>>> That's five syllables.
>>
>> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
>> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
>> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>>
>>>
>>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit
>>> of rule #1:
>>>
>>> (1) It's a single word
>>>
>>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>>
>> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
>> This is no argument.
>>
>>>
>>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>>
>>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>>
>> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
>> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
>> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
>> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>>
>>>
>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>
>>>> Jack,
>>>>
>>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>>
>>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>>>> good choice.
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>>>> re-vote for
>>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>>
>>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>>
>>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to
>>>>>>> retain
>>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product.
>>>>>>> However,
>>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
Ok, I just want an up-or-down vote on ManifoldCF at this point. +1 from me.
Karl
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
>> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
>> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
>> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use
>> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>>
>> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
>> selection rule #5:
>>
>> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>>
>> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>>
>> That's five syllables.
>
> ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
> many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
> for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>
>>
>> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit
>> of rule #1:
>>
>> (1) It's a single word
>>
>> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
>
> That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
> This is no argument.
>
>>
>> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>>
>> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
>
> Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
> list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
> this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
> ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> Jack,
>>>
>>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>>
>>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>>> good choice.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>>
>>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>>> re-vote for
>>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>>
>>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>>
>>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Karl
>>>>>
>>>>
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
On 9/28/10 7:10 PM, Jack Krupansky wrote:
> Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
> "CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than
> any of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use
> "MCF" as the shorthand name.
>
> Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
> selection rule #5:
>
> (5) No more than 4 syllables
>
> Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
>
> That's five syllables.
ManifoldCF was already in the running. And its obvious that having too
many syllables is not a problem - it was the second most voted name -
for the *second* time at least (who can track all these votes).
>
> And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit
> of rule #1:
>
> (1) It's a single word
>
> It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
That's a stretch that the rational part of my brain is going to ignore.
This is no argument.
>
> So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
>
> Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
Okay, lets vote again. For some reason ManifoldCF will stop topping the
list why? Everyone will come to their senses? Some of us are so sick of
this name thing we won't vote, and if your lucky those will be the
ManifoldCF supporters? I mean come on...
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>
>> Jack,
>>
>> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
>> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>>
>> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
>> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
>> good choice.
>>
>> Karl
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
>> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>>
>>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really
>>> re-vote for
>>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>>
>>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>>
>>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>>
>>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>>
>>>>> Karl
>>>>
>>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
Fair enough. I could live with any of the other choices, but having this
"CF" suffix really messes a lot of stuff up and is less practical than any
of the other names. Basically, it means we may end up having to use "MCF" as
the shorthand name.
Wait... stop the presses... I just realized that "ManifoldCF" violates
selection rule #5:
(5) No more than 4 syllables
Man-I-fold-C-F (or is in Ma-ni-fold-C-F.)
That's five syllables.
And, technically, I would say that it at least half violates the spirit of
rule #1:
(1) It's a single word
It is a single word plus this extra "CF" acronym thing.
So, next candidate on the list was... Manicon, 19
Unless it has legal problems, it fits our requirements.
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:52 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> Jack,
>
> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>
> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
> good choice.
>
> Karl
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>
>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really re-vote
>> for
>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>
>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>
>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>
>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
+1 on just moving down the list. We put our votes in order, so this
makes perfect sense to me. Why revote? Next candidate in the list!
- Mark
On 9/28/10 6:52 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
> Jack,
>
> That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
> priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
>
> I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
> the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
> good choice.
>
> Karl
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
> <ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
>> Or Nocon or Noman.
>>
>> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really re-vote for
>> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>>
>> -- Jack Krupansky
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
>> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>>
>>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>>
>>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>>
>>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>>
>>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>>
>>>> Karl
>>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
Jack,
That's one of the main purposes of having everyone list choices by
priority. If one doesn't work, there are others you can use.
I don't want to open that vote again unless the community decides that
the list of candidate names was simply not rich enough to furnish a
good choice.
Karl
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jack Krupansky
<ja...@lucidimagination.com> wrote:
> Or Nocon or Noman.
>
> I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really re-vote for
> the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
>
> -- Jack Krupansky
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
> To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
>
>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>
>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>>
>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>
>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>
>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
Or Nocon or Noman.
I know people are tired of voting, but I think we should really re-vote for
the revised candidate list with Connex removed.
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Mark Miller" <ma...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:43 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>
> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>
>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>
>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>
>> Karl
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Jack Krupansky <ja...@lucidimagination.com>.
Karl, you are the de facto naming czar. You get to take the community input
and figure out how to "interpret" it so that it so that it reflects a
general sense of the spirit of the community.
So, now you get to "rule" on my objections to ManifoldCF! And the chips can
fall where they may.
-- Jack Krupansky
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Karl Wright" <da...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 6:46 PM
To: <co...@incubator.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
> I'm tempted. Apache Nothing has a nice ring to it. ;-)
>
> Maybe we should just give up with the voting and appoint a Naming
> Czar. Seriously.
>
> Karl
>
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>>
>> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>>
>>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>>
>>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>>
>>> Karl
>>
>>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Karl Wright <da...@gmail.com>.
I'm tempted. Apache Nothing has a nice ring to it. ;-)
Maybe we should just give up with the voting and appoint a Naming
Czar. Seriously.
Karl
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
>
> On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
>> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
>> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
>> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>>
>> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>>
>> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
>> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
>> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
>> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
>> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>>
>> Karl
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Rename Apache Connectors Framework to ManifoldCF
Posted by Mark Miller <ma...@gmail.com>.
hmmm...I think I'm all voted out. Can we just call it nothing?
On 9/28/10 6:40 PM, Karl Wright wrote:
> Vote +1 to rename Apache Connectors Framework to Apache ManifoldCF.
> Vote -1 to keep the project name of Connectors Framework, or to retain
> Connex, if that wins its vote.
>
> This vote also expires end of day on Friday.
>
> Note: "Manifold" is a trademark for a GIS software product. However,
> I agree with Grant that ManifoldCF appearing under the Apache label
> should be safe to be used. But you should recognize that this vote is
> not merely a referendum on the name itself, but also on the
> suitability of the name in a legal context.
>
> Karl