Stan Silvert wrote:
> I posted this yesterday but it didn't go through:
>
> +1 for a name change. I have heard that referring to it as the
> Reference Implementation also raises licensing/IP restrictions. Anyone
> know about this?
>
Hmm, nothing that I'm aware of. Could be wrong.
> Besides that, RI has a connotation of "not production quality". Maybe
> we call it something like, "JSF Production Series"?
>
You mean something like <Insert Codename Here> - JSF Production Series?
> Stan Silvert
> JBoss, a division of RedHat
> ssilvert_at_jboss.com
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ryan.Lubke_at_Sun.COM [mailto:Ryan.Lubke_at_Sun.COM]
>> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 3:17 PM
>> To: dev_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>> Subject: It's about time we had a code name and a logo
>>
>> I'm not speaking for anyone else when I say this, but I've become
>> somewhat wearing
>> of our project being referred to as the "RI".
>>
>> So, that having been said, I'm looking to see what others have for
>>
> ideas.
>
>> Please post em here!
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_javaserverfaces.dev.java.net
>
>