stpeter at jabber.org
Wed Aug 23 17:28:13 CDT 2006
Ralph Meijer wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:13:37PM -0700, Chris Mullins wrote:
>> Personally, I'm partial to SoapBox Address. I wouldn't be at all
>> surprised if Matt quite likes WildFire Address, or if Joe really loves
>> Jabber Id.
> I think using XMPP exclusively to denote the protocol goes a nice way to
> accomodate those who have issues with this JABBER trademark. In the past
> numerous flamewars^Wdiscussions on this have passed, and I think the
> positions are pretty clear on that.
> Please, let's not go further down that road. It was a pretty nice
> constructive thread until I maybe triggered this. Let's go back to that.
> As Peter said, JID is pretty well anchored in our community and the
> RFCs. I think we have more things to worry about now than to change
> /all/ of our terminology and create a new universe around the same
Going back to the original subject: given that we seem to have consensus
on the protocol branding, I think the next step is for me to write up a
formal proposal that the Board can approve (I don't think it needs to be
a JEP). Given that a new Board (and Council) will be seated on September
20, we could wait until then, or just get this approved and move on with
our lives. Then we need to have a "quiet period" for the JEPs (probably
~2 weeks) while we make all the relevant changes.
Oh, and keep those Board and Council position papers coming:
Would "job descriptions" help?
Jabber Software Foundation
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 7358 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20060823/03adbe7c/smime.bin
More information about the Members