Re: Proposed: evolution

[Bryan Clark <bclark redhat com>]

On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 15:11 -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote: 
> On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 14:59, Bryan Clark wrote:
> > On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 14:29 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
> > > can you actually find any Ximian Evolution or Novell Evolution strings
> > > anywhere in your evolution? cuz I can't :-)
> > 
> > On a purely academic test that isn't anywhere near conclusive or
> > complete...
> > 
> > [clarkbw rhbw evolution]$ grep -r \(\"Evolution * | wc -l
> > 32
> 
> Evolution is the name of the program... 

I think you're confusing project name with the application visible name,
see below.

> that wouldn't show any signs of
> the Ximian or Novell branding.  And no, GNOME does not require that apps
> lose their application name.  Epiphany is still called Epiphany. 

Epiphany's menu entry is "Web Browser" and doesn't display the Project
name other than in the about box.

> Nautilus is still called Nautilus.  

No, this menu entry is called "Browse Filesystem"

> Letting Evolution be Evolution is
> just fine, so long as we're not throwing in the corporate bias (Novell
> Evolution, Ximian Evolution, etc.)

That doesn't make sense.  Project names have little to no meaning to
people using the applications, this is why we require functional names
to appear instead.

~ Bryan