Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Mars+1 Naming Issues

I really must be biased. The clear winner is “I don’t like any of these names”. Nano and Naboo were the only ones to have more votes that weren’t that than the write-in votes for Nimoy.

Doug.

From: Mike Milinkovich <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Eclipse Foundation
Reply-To: "mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx" <mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Eclipse Planning Council private list <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 6:58 AM
To: "eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx" <eclipse.org-planning-council@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-planning-council] Mars+1 Naming Issues

On 04/03/2015 12:11 AM, Chris Aniszczyk wrote:
The top three winners are Nash, Nano and Naiad by Planning Council votes

I would suggest that we flunk Nano now, based on        
https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Nano and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_Nano

--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1.613.220.3223 (mobile)

EclipseCon
          2015
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.

Back to the top