directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brett Porter <>
Subject Re: We are now a TLP guys!!! (FW: ASF Board Summary for February 23, 2005)
Date Wed, 02 Mar 2005 23:28:08 GMT
Hash: SHA1

For the benefit of those who weren't involved at that point or who, like
me, have a short memory - we've been there already.

Here is a sumary of the reasons for the current name:
- - The existing name, Eve, had trademark concerns as did many others
within the project.
- - Anything LDAPish is out because the scope of the server goes beyond
- - There is already a strong brand in Apache, so there is not a great
need to develop a new one
- - Many of the names don't convey what the product is: Apache Directory
Server does. This would hamper recognition.

I personally don't feel another name change is going to bring a benefit,
but it would have the following detriments:
- - some poor sucker would need to trawl subversion -again- and change
all the site references, artifact names, directories, etc.
- - lose any recognition already gained from the 0.8 release
- - have to delay going public on the TLP until the name can be properly
considered, checked and implemented.

I wouldn't be adverse to a name change later if it is felt that will
strengthen the recognition of the product without any harm, and
something comes up that meets all the criteria above, but I think a
better time for that is probably around a 1.0 mark where there is
already momentum. But I also think sticking with Apache Directory Server
is just fine as well.

Hope this helps.


Brennan Stehling wrote:

>So Covey is still holding strong? That is my favorite and the
>definitions seems to apply well.
>On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 00:04:38 +0100, Stephane Bailliez
><> wrote:
>>Brennan Stehling wrote:
>>>We should brainstorm on a good brand name which works well.
>>Appaloosa ?

Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -


View raw message