Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question about theBranding requirement fo

[Dave Steinberg <davidms@xxxxxxxxxx>]

It's almost enough to make one pine for the simpler days when everyone just used "Eclipse.org" as the provider, isn't it?

In all seriousness though, it seems unfortunate to me that we're talking about how to cram up to three pieces of information (Eclipse, top-level project, and subproject) into a single field. Leaving it to the projects to decide will probably result in a mess of inconsistency, while more rules will no doubt feel like straightjackets to some projects.

I think the best pieces of guidance we've seen so far were to start the name with Eclipse and to limit this only to "major projects (the top-level projects except for the Tools and Technology projects where it is the sub-projects)," as bug 252813 originally specified. I'm seeing mention of sub-project names in this thread (Equinox, EMF, JDT, etc.), which seems like a recipe for chaos.

My understanding of this requirement was that we were supposed to contribute a nice array of icons on the About Eclipse dialog, showing the major components in the running product, each with a suitably descriptive tool tip (which comes from the provider name of one of the associated features). So, I really don't understand why sub-projects that don't have their own icons (like Equinox, EMF, or JDT) should have their own provider names.

Cheers,
Dave

--
Dave Steinberg
Rational Software - IBM Toronto Lab
mailto:davidms@xxxxxxxxxx


Thomas Hallgren ---03/20/2009 04:58:01 AM---Ed Merks wrote: Thomas,

From:	Thomas Hallgren <thomas@xxxxxxx>
To:	Cross project issues <cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	03/20/2009 04:58 AM
Subject:	Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Question about theBranding requirement for Galileo

---

Ed Merks wrote:

Thomas,

Are you seriously suggesting that we come up with a better name than EMF? We've been using for the last seven years...

Not really. I agree that EMF is a strong brand today :-)

What I'm serious about is that if project branding is important to Galileo and coming release trains, and if we really care about how things look when listed together and want to convey an impression that it all stems from the same family, then the frequent use of abbreviations is starting to become problematic. The problem gets worse over time since many new proposed projects continue in that vein.

- thomas
_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev