Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 04:30:31PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: >> I wrote: >>> Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >>>> <_name>Windows cross-compiler</_name> >>> Why not be specific and say MinGW cross compiler or MinGW32 cross >>> compiler? >> PS: I think using "Windows" that way can also get us in trademark trouble. >> We'd have to say "Cross-compiler targeting Microsoft Windows" or something >> equally stupid. Now of course using "Winblow$" or something like that >> instead could avoid us the trademark lawsuit, but then RH Legal will freak >> out about "disparaging". ;-) So I think "MinGW cross compiler" is the best >> solution to keep the name short, and then description can cite the >> trademarks in a way which is clearly fair use. >> >> What do you think? > > I wanted a new name for this project that doesn't involve using > trademarks and doesn't carry the baggage of "MinGW", and also reflects > the fact that we might want to broaden support to other non-embedded > platforms in future. > > So far my best effort was "Consumer cross-compilers" (CCC) or > "Consumer cross-compiler collection" (CCCC). i also vote for this as we like to support other cross compiler in the future and it'd be useful not to change the name. -- Levente "Si vis pacem para bellum!" -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
