[wsf-dev] [Igf-dev] Fwd: Naming of WSF and IGF

[Scott Cantor]

Brett McDowell wrote:
> option A:
> OpenLiberty TrustFed ToolKit

I really don't see what TrustFed has to do with the project. All of the 
trust-related code, last I knew, was from OpenSAML.

> option B: (I'm just throwing something out there... it seems the heart 
> of WSF is the concept of "my services")
> OpenLiberty MyServices ToolKit

I could certainly imagine calling it the OpenLiberty WebServices ToolKit.

> option C (already one vote against this from Phil, but let's just keep 
> the options on the table until we get a decision):
> OpenLiberty OpenWSF ToolKit

I definitely disagree with Phil on the issue of the word Open, which I think 
is both essential to the name, and well worth repeating, as well as 
self-documenting.

> option D: (noting one vote for this from Phil... maybe)
> OpenLiberty Panda ToolKit

I don't think Phil would advocate for a hybrid. If you want to call it 
Panda, then that's the name, by itself.

>     So to give others some context: OpenLiberty/J turns out to be a
>     little short sighted.   Since OpenLiberty has numerous projects, to
>     which we are now adding regularly, we need to find a name that does
>     not confuse this point.  So we are back in the naming game.

To be clear, I wasn't being short sighted at all in advocating for that 
name. It was to *prevent* exactly this argument by subsuming all of the 
possible project code under one heading.

Disagreement is certainly fine and expected, but I wanted my motivation to 
be clear. I *wanted* to force all of the projects to just accept an umbrella 
name, so to the extent people object to that, that's the point of my arguing 
for it.

-- Scott