[rules-users] name

[Mark Proctor]

I've asked this on dev, thought i'd also ask on user - what's your 
opinions on the email below?

Mark
Mark Proctor wrote:
> So it's over a year since we changed the name from Drools to JBoss 
> Rules. Personally I really dislike <Vendor Name> + <Generic Name> 
> naming schemes; especially so for Open Source projects. It's not the 
> vendor prefix I dislike, as that adds weight in corporate brand 
> recognition, but the generic postfix - leaving you no choice but to 
> refer to the project by the full name "JBoss Rules" in all 
> communication and throughout that communication; which I find 
> tiresome. Where as ideally, say in a presentation, you introduce the 
> project as JBoss + <Strong Name> first and then further references in 
> your presentation can just use the shortened <Strong name>; emails on 
> the mailing list, being more casual, can just drop to the shortened 
> <Strong Name> straight away. It's not just a lazyiness of having to 
> use two words, but I feel it makes it generally easier on the ears and 
> eyes. With 4.0 coming up we have taken the next steps into the world 
> of Declarative programming, so was thinking of JBoss DRules or JBoss 
> D-Rules or JBoss drules - allowing the DRules to be used standalone to 
> refer to the project in more casual communication. Anyone have any 
> thoughts on a year of the "JBoss Rules" name?
>
> Mark
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>