[news.eclipse.platform.swt] Re: Naming the Eclipse Application Framework

["David J. Orme" <daveo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

KC Jones wrote:
> The fact that most of us developing stand-alone applications
> with SWT end up wanting and using JFace is not a reason to
> dilute the SWT "brand".  Make no mistake, SWT is a brand and
> it does have both strength and value in the "marketplace" of
> developer mindshare.  Beware of fiddling with success.

Thanks KC,

I tend to agree with you regarding SWT being like a brand name and 
meaning more in the marketplace than just org.eclipse.swt the library 
(and said as much in my SWT talk at Web Services Edge East).

Personally I think I would like to see all non-Eclipse standalone rich 
client applications just called SWT applications, but this is not what 
people inside Eclipse.org have done so far.

Probably the thing to do is just to wait.  Especially with things up in 
the air about what rich client features will be in 2.2/3.0, this will 
sort itself out with time.

Dave
--
Dave Orme
Advanced Systems Concepts
http://www.swtworkbench.com