alemela
commented
8 years ago The choice of the name has caught us off guard, so why the "frankly ugly and twenty-ish" result. If we are a software development collective maybe libre company is to much company
A Company is a legal entity made up of an association of persons; by wikipedia.
For me there is no problem being named after that company, but it doesn't reflect the individual spirit of our participation.
If I remember correctly someone issued that being open during the competition can be disadvantageous. But I think there wasn't any opposition for open the repository just before the ending of the hackathon. Personally I'm for let the code open from the beginning.
In brief:
- do whatever with name
- +1 for open the repo from now
bassosimone
I know this is bike shedding, but I wanted to raise once again the issue of the group name, this time on business model grounds. My reasoning goes like this: if we're to present a business model and be credible to people evaluating our work, why not being named after a company (synapta) or, if you prefer, after a software development collective backed by synpata (libre company) rather than being named after something weird (and frankly ugly and twenty-ish) like "las panteras"?
On this point: why don't we put the repository under the libre company umbrella? Why don't we open it from the beginning and then brag over the fact that we're open and we follow standards and good coding practices (sure we need to find out those practices for the domain of interest first).
Whaddya reckon?