Malcolm Rowe wrote:
>> d. As part of the name of a product designed to work with Subversion,
>> so long as the name as a whole (via its other components) clearly and
>> unambiguously distinguishes the product from Subversion itself, and the
>> general presentation of the product does not imply any official
>> association or identity with Subversion.
> +1 for "SVN", -1 for "Subversion": People already expect FooSVN to be a
> Subversion client, but there's no reason to extend "Subversion" to mean
> anything other than a (possibly modified) Subversion client.
Yeah, I agree. I think "Subversion" should be reserved for only (possibly
modified) distributions of Subversion, not for alternative clients, IDE
plugins, converters, etc. Let the "SVN" namespace be the more relaxed place
for "third-party" integrations and clients, but hold "Subversion" more closely.
Looking at our links page, this policy would cause problems only for a
couple of existing softwares:
"CW Subversion" (which could be renamed "CWSVN -- Subversion(R)
integrationfor Code Warrior(R))
"SubversionSharp" (which could be renamed "SVNSharp")
C. Michael Pilato <firstname.lastname@example.org>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on Mon Jun 4 17:12:42 2007