[rules-users] name

[Ellen Ning Zhao]

Wonderful idea. I personally like the pronounciation of "Drools", so 
DRules is appealing as well.


Ellen

Mark Proctor wrote:
> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>