On Mon, 2004-09-20 at 01:02 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 09:58:04PM -0700, Kenneth Porter wrote: > > >Proposed Option #1: Rename libc-client to imap-libs > > Any reason not to call it uwimap-libs? Why should it get premier naming as > > implementor of IMAP? (I realize it's a reference implementation of the > > protocol by the protocol's author, but we don't call BIND "dns".) > > we call Apache "httpd". :) Yes. But calling that 'apache-httpd' wouldn't cause people to run screaming from the building instead of actually _using_ it. Whereas calling this 'uwimap-libs' instead of just 'imap-libs' probably _would_ have that effect. Which is probably a good thing for all concerned. -- dwmw2
