mime4j maven artifact names

[Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>]

Folks

I personally think having 'apache' in a maven artifact name is not very 
conventional and unnecessary. Since we are creating new artifacts 
anyways. Would anyone object to renaming

apache-mime4j-core -> mime4j-parser
apache-mime4j-dom -> mime4j-dom

and so on?

Oleg

Re: mime4j maven artifact names

[Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Feb 6, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Norman Maurer <no...@apache.org> wrote:
> To be hornest, I think renaming it would help us shorten the artifact
> names so after thinkin more on it I think it would make sense to cut
> of the prefix

i was just explaining why the artifact includes apache. up to the
community whether they want to keep it.

- robert

Re: mime4j maven artifact names

[Norman Maurer <no...@apache.org>]

To be hornest, I think renaming it would help us shorten the artifact
names so after thinkin more on it I think it would make sense to cut
of the prefix

Bye
Norman
2010/2/6, Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Norman Maurer <no...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I think it was Robert who sugguest it in the past
>>>
>>> Anyway I would be happy without the prefix too.
>>>
>>> So +0
>>
>> the reasoning behind the prefix goes like this. apache mime4j is the
>> trademark. anyone can produce another jar and call it mime4j. if
>> someone produces an apache-mime4j jar with nefarious or substandard
>> contents then apache is in a stronger position.
>>
>> but i don't think this has been written in stone and dates back to the
>> misty old days. if people prefer just mime4j then ask on legal discuss
>> for a definitive modern ruling.
>>
>> - robert
>>
>
> Robert et al
>
> I cant think of any project other than James that makes use of such
> naming convention, but I guess it is more important that things stay
> consistent within the same project.
>
> Forget my suggestion
>
> Oleg
>

Re: mime4j maven artifact names

[Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>]

Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Norman Maurer <no...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I think it was Robert who sugguest it in the past
>>
>> Anyway I would be happy without the prefix too.
>>
>> So +0
> 
> the reasoning behind the prefix goes like this. apache mime4j is the
> trademark. anyone can produce another jar and call it mime4j. if
> someone produces an apache-mime4j jar with nefarious or substandard
> contents then apache is in a stronger position.
> 
> but i don't think this has been written in stone and dates back to the
> misty old days. if people prefer just mime4j then ask on legal discuss
> for a definitive modern ruling.
> 
> - robert
> 

Robert et al

I cant think of any project other than James that makes use of such 
naming convention, but I guess it is more important that things stay 
consistent within the same project.

Forget my suggestion

Oleg

Re: mime4j maven artifact names

[Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Norman Maurer <no...@apache.org> wrote:
> I think it was Robert who sugguest it in the past
>
> Anyway I would be happy without the prefix too.
>
> So +0

the reasoning behind the prefix goes like this. apache mime4j is the
trademark. anyone can produce another jar and call it mime4j. if
someone produces an apache-mime4j jar with nefarious or substandard
contents then apache is in a stronger position.

but i don't think this has been written in stone and dates back to the
misty old days. if people prefer just mime4j then ask on legal discuss
for a definitive modern ruling.

- robert

Re: mime4j maven artifact names

[Norman Maurer <no...@apache.org>]

I think it was Robert who sugguest it in the past

Anyway I would be happy without the prefix too.

So +0

bye
Norman
2010/2/5, Stefano Bagnara <ap...@bago.org>:
> 2010/2/5 Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>:
>> Folks
>>
>> I personally think having 'apache' in a maven artifact name is not very
>> conventional and unnecessary. Since we are creating new artifacts anyways.
>> Would anyone object to renaming
>>
>> apache-mime4j-core -> mime4j-parser
>> apache-mime4j-dom -> mime4j-dom
>
> I don't have strong opinion on this. I can tell you that originally it
> was mime4j and not apache-mime4j and we changed it because (as I
> understood it) using "apache" in the name is the best way to allow ASF
> to protect the product (I don't remember who suggested this).
>
> So, +/- 0 from me.
>
> Stefano
>

Re: mime4j maven artifact names

[Norman Maurer <no...@apache.org>]

2010/2/5, Stefano Bagnara <ap...@bago.org>:
> 2010/2/5 Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>:
>> Folks
>>
>> I personally think having 'apache' in a maven artifact name is not very
>> conventional and unnecessary. Since we are creating new artifacts anyways.
>> Would anyone object to renaming
>>
>> apache-mime4j-core -> mime4j-parser
>> apache-mime4j-dom -> mime4j-dom
>
> I don't have strong opinion on this. I can tell you that originally it
> was mime4j and not apache-mime4j and we changed it because (as I
> understood it) using "apache" in the name is the best way to allow ASF
> to protect the product (I don't remember who suggested this).
>
> So, +/- 0 from me.
>
> Stefano
>

Re: mime4j maven artifact names

[Stefano Bagnara <ap...@bago.org>]

2010/2/5 Oleg Kalnichevski <ol...@apache.org>:
> Folks
>
> I personally think having 'apache' in a maven artifact name is not very
> conventional and unnecessary. Since we are creating new artifacts anyways.
> Would anyone object to renaming
>
> apache-mime4j-core -> mime4j-parser
> apache-mime4j-dom -> mime4j-dom

I don't have strong opinion on this. I can tell you that originally it
was mime4j and not apache-mime4j and we changed it because (as I
understood it) using "apache" in the name is the best way to allow ASF
to protect the product (I don't remember who suggested this).

So, +/- 0 from me.

Stefano