CMSimple is now released under GPL 3

[Holger]

It's bets to stay with the name.

+1

Holger

[johnjdoe]

I also think that keeping the "XH" is best corresponding to CMSimple_XH. It may be confusing to have different names for a website and for the software. Hm?

I agree. The name of the successor of CMSimple is CMSimple_XH. It's confusing if you have a website cmsimple-xh.de and cmsimple.eu. It's best to stay with the name.

Yeap, that's my opinion too!

[Ikko]

OK, than "cmsimpleforum.com" should be renamed "cmsimpleXHforum.com"...

[wosee]

I don't really get it, why won't you just rename CMSimple_XH to CMSimple 3.4 and carry on development, as Peter said

...and future development has to be carried on by others...

I think he meant you.

Don't get me wrong, but imho CMSimple_XH is a very confusing name and even looks stupid. I appreciate your work a lot, what you do is awesome, but I'd like to see CMSimple being developed rather than CMSimple_XH.

Well, it's up to you.

[Gert]

Hi wosee,

as we was beginning, CMSimple 3.4 was not possible under Peters license conditions. Now the baby is born.

I think, CMSimple_XH is an logical name, because you can setup Websites in Xhtml or html, and it's ready for html 5, but the Editors dont't produce html5-conforming content at the moment,

Gert

[wosee]

I know, but now it is possible, am I right? Why should CMSimple 3.4 not have this "bugfix"? I don't think that valid code is that important to be mentioned it in the name of the project. Valid code is a standard, or at least it should be!

The valid plugins could be contributed with these XH thing, to show that they generate valid code!

[leenm]

Don't get me wrong, but imho CMSimple_XH is a very confusing name and even looks stupid. I appreciate your work a lot, what you do is awesome, but I'd like to see CMSimple being developed rather than CMSimple_XH.

I don't think CMSimple_XH is a stupid name, but that's personal. As CMSimple_XH developer, I wouldn't mind to change the name back to CMSimple.

as we was beginning, CMSimple 3.4 was not possible under Peters license conditions. Now the baby is born.

So now it's possible (?)

I don't think that valid code is that important to be mentioned it in the name of the project. Valid code is a standard, or at least it should be!
The valid plugins could be contributed with these XH thing, to show that they generate valid code!

+1

But I don't think this is going to happen, because all developers have to agree with this. Also there's something to say for the new name (CMSimple_XH), so I won't mind which name it is, as long as it isn't confusing for anyone. That's most important for me.

Leen

[Gert]

So now it's possible (?)

I don't know, and I don't want

And now @ all:

We have discussed some names by beginning, and the most wanted name for the baby was ..._XH. Now the domain is paid, the Google ranking is good, and I think cmsimple-xh.de is bookmarked in a lot of browsers.

And I think, we should present the new quality of CMSimple_XH by name. If we would take another name, other guys would not like that other name. Let's discuss and think about more important things

[leenm]

We have discussed some names by beginning, and the most wanted name for the baby was ..._XH. Now the domain is paid, the Google ranking is good, and I think cmsimple-xh.de is bookmarked in a lot of browsers.

And I think, we should present the new quality of CMSimle_XH by name. If we would take another name, other guys would not like that other name. Let's discuss and think about more important things

Don't think I want to change the name now , as I said:

so I won't mind which name it is, as long as it isn't confusing for anyone. That's most important for me.

I would be confusing if we change the name.

Leen

[Gert]

Hallo Leen, I understood right

Your quoted lines are written under "And now @ all:"

And now @ all:

We have discussed some names by beginning ... Let's discuss and think about more important things "

I not have meant you with that