Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[] Simultaneous Release Naming

Greetings Planning Council,

I'm a bit puzzled by the recent events with regards to the Eclipse name. I saw an update yesterday closing bug

Based on the solution given I scanned through the meeting minutes and found the ones from April:

I just saw that there was a call yesterday. Apologize if someone brought this to your attention already and this is duplicate info. However, I do believe there is an issue with the selected name.

Here is what puzzles me:

> The conclusion of this topic for the board is that the planning council
> is for all the Eclipse projects and the Simultaneaous Release could include 
> all Eclipse projects. The board does not care about the naming. 

I was a board member till March 2018 and participated in branding discussions. I'm very, very certain that the words above do not reflect the opinion of the board. Especially the last sentence. It certainly does not reflect mine and I had the impression that the board cares about the name. We did not decide on a specific name, though. Finding and selecting a name was left to the Planing Council. However, we did discuss some specific requirements and it looks like those weren't properly communicated to the Planning Council. 

It's my understanding that the requirement for any name is that it *must* comply with the Foundation's project naming and branding guidelines. The name "Eclipse MM-YYYY" does not comply. Thus, it simply won't be possible. There must be a qualifier.

I also don't buy into the "inclusive" claim. I really think that the Planning Council should accept reality and focus the Simultaneous Release towards the Desktop IDE. As such, I'd like to see a specific name becoming a brand synonym for the Eclipse Desktop IDE. FWIW, "Eclipse IDE" is sufficient for me personally and it was part of a branding discussion. But I'm not a branding expert so my name selection skills should not be considered a viable solution.


Gunnar Wagenknecht

Back to the top