From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5400 invoked by alias); 22 Feb 2002 18:05:12 -0000 Mailing-List: contact sourcenav-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: sourcenav-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 5293 invoked from network); 22 Feb 2002 18:05:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO PH01SRV02.photuris.com) (141.150.26.4) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 22 Feb 2002 18:05:09 -0000 Received: by PH01SRV02.photuris.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:02:27 -0500 Message-ID: From: Doug Fraser To: 'Eray Ozkural' , Doug Fraser , 'Mo DeJong' , sourcenav Subject: RE: New CVS module to checkout. Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 10:26:00 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-SW-Source: 2002-q1/txt/msg00112.txt.bz2 Oh, I think sourcebase would be fine. I really do. I was just thinking of something more poetic, more artful. A library is what you are building, in both senses. A linkable library that acts as a backend to other development tools and also a library as in sense 4 of the American Heritage Dictionary: 4. An organized collection of recorded data arranged for ease of use. but then, sourcebase is more descriptive. Alexandria would not immediately imply to the casual web surfer that they had just encountered the neatest source discovery tools anywhere in the solar system. Sourcebase may just clue them in that direction.... Doug > -----Original Message----- > From: Eray Ozkural [mailto:erayo@cs.bilkent.edu.tr] > How about simply sticking with 'sourcebase'? Mo had said 'sourceDB'. > sourcebase means a database of sources, a la knowledge base. > > Thanks, > > - -- > Eray Ozkural (exa) >