Permission issue of the name: Classic Shell

[coddec]

Help to Share the poll if you care about this project.
https://tpfuser.typeform.com/to/ZNKbN8

(Results:)
https://tpfuser.typeform.com/report/ZNKbN8/MiUlWb2BRqaMvrq4

---

05/05/2018

Depend on the result of the poll, the new name will be: Classic Start

Future development will be made here: https://github.com/passionate-coder/Classic-Start

[coddec]

[ge0rdi]

@coddec
Could you also ask Ivo about the company name (IvoSoft) and copyright notice (Copyright (C) 2009-2016, Ivo Beltchev)?

[coddec]

@ge0rdi
Here's the answer from Ivo.

So I guess It's probably better if I fork it with a new name and then we continue on that one?
Any suggestions are welcome!
@XenHat

[ge0rdi]

I'm not sure his answer means that we need to use different name. You should ask him directly about whether we are supposed to change it or not.

In the original announcement thread, Ivo said:

I would like nothing more than somebody else picking up the mantle and continue the development.

http://classicshell.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=34939&f=4#p34939

To me it sounds like he wishes that someone will continue in his (definitely great) work.

[coddec]

@ge0rdi
Ummm, based on this answer, it sounds like he suggest us to fork and continue development on the forked with new name?

I haven't really thought about it, however I do like to retain the ownership of the Classic Shell brand.
The main idea of making it open source was to allow people to fork it and make something new.
I guess, ideally you should keep the Classic Shell repository pristine, fork it under a new name, and continue development.

As for copyright issues, I would like some sort of reference to the original, like include "Based on the Classic Shell source code by Ivo Beltchev" or something like that in the documentation.

[ge0rdi]

Ah, sorry. I saw only first line of his response :(

So what's next?
Do you want to create new repo with different name (what should it be?) and simply revert master in actual repo to original (Ivo's) state?

[ge0rdi]

I'd have one more proposal.
If you plan to create new repo, you may consider to create organization and create repo there.
Organization accounts are for free and you can easily add more people to the organization.

Of course if you prefer to have it as personal repo I definitely don't have any issues with that (and I'd gladly collaborate on it).

[coddec]

@ge0rdi No problem!
Sounds great, can I create an organization which based on fork of this project?
Seems it's better will benefit the project more?

I guess we can leave the current project as it is, since there's not much change, especially copyright parts.
But we need to come up with a new name for sure, any ideas?

[ge0rdi]

Sounds great, can I create an organization which based on fork of this project?
Seems it's better will benefit the project more?

I think you should create organization first and then fork from coddec/Classic-Shell from organization's account. Though I don't have any experience with this. So I guess you should just try and see :)

But we need to come up with a new name for sure, any ideas?

Uff. This is the hardest part (at least for me) :(
I've never thought of creating completely new project out of this. I merely wanted to help with maintenance (support new compilers, Win10 versions) as I'm using CS (actually only Start Menu part) and want to use it further.
So I'm afraid I won't be of much help regarding to naming :(

I think we need to give it some time. Maybe you can also ask on original CS forums, some poll or so.

[coddec]

I'll try to play with organization, see how far can I go haha.

I'll try to get the name sort out...

[ge0rdi]

Not sure if it can contain Classic-Shell or it has to be totally different.
The thing is that many people know CS, so it may be good idea to have some reference in name.

[coddec]

And I use only start menu part as well, I guess probably later, start menu part will be the only part left active sometime in the future?

Or we can discuss this issue later, we should get the name sort out first haha

Ummmm, good point

[ge0rdi]

I guess probably later, start menu part will be the only part left active sometime in the future?

Cool. At least we can agree on something ;)

Seriously, I hope nobody is really using IE anymore, so Classic IE probably won't get much attention.
Not sure about Classic Explorer though. I'd say there are plenty of explorer alternatives if one needs a bit more advanced file management.

Classic Start will make sense for the future, because well Win10 start menu has its limitations.

So maybe we can consider to focus on start menu replacement and then choose name like Classic Start (not sure if Ivo wants to keep that name too). Eventually something similar like Classic Start Reborn / Alternative Start (dunno).

[coddec]

Exactly what I was thinking, I prefer to focus on start menu part. That way it will reduce the work load to maintain it as well, which is very important I guess, at least for now.

Again, same thoughts on the names. ;)

[coddec]

I guess next step is to share the poll url....

https://tpfuser.typeform.com/to/ZNKbN8

Also posted here http://www.classicshell.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=8273

[ge0rdi]

Voted.

[coddec]

Cool, thanks for voting and proving the form works! XD

Not so sure if it has anti-spam function though...

[ge0rdi]

Not so sure if it has anti-spam function though...

Hope you won't regret it :)

[coddec]

Results link if anyone interested: https://tpfuser.typeform.com/report/ZNKbN8/MiUlWb2BRqaMvrq4

[coddec]

Just checked, seems it has some sort of anti-spam function, ummmm, good

Now let's wait on results...

[ge0rdi]

Also maybe you should check with Ivo whether he is OK with picking name that contains Classic Start.
Or have you already?

[coddec]

Haven't yet... Personally think it's fine. I will pm him now.

[smz]

Hello guys! Nice to see that you're moving forward with this!

Do not forget to ask Ivo about "non-code" material that could be copyrighted (e.g.: icons and other graphic material).

An "Organization" (in the GitHub meaning) is a good idea, but if you move forward I guess you should also make that organization a "legal entity" (with all the bothering paperwork that comes with that, I know...)

As for the name... I was thinking about "Classic Start Menu", but it seems it's already taken. If any Idea will pop-up in my mind I'll let you know...

Have you considered the possibility of bringing forward only the "Start Menu" component of "Classic Shell" and leave "Classic IE" and "Classic Explorer" behind? I've never found them of great use to me and it's a long time that I don't install them any more...

[coddec]

I guess we will need to redesign most of the non-code parts too, based on Ivo's previous reply.

For the legal entity part. I guess we can ignore it if we do not check "This account is owned by a business." we should be able to safely ignore the paperwork? (See attached image)

Thanks for the name part, I'm not good at thinking name too...

That what ge0dri and me was talking about, I guess in the future, we will only keep the start menu part.

[smz]

For the legal entity part. I guess we can ignore it if we do not check "This account is owned by a business." we should be able to safely ignore the paperwork? (See attached image)

That's important not only to fulfill GitHub requirement but also for your own protection and for the one of the contributing members. Imagine a couple of scenarios:

• Microsoft sues. Are you ready to loose your house and car on that?
• After some time you "go commercial". What is protecting all the ones that have contributed to the project?

That what ge0dri and me was talking about, I guess in the future, we will only keep the start menu part.

+1 from me!

[smz]

Names:

• "Open Start Menu", underlying it's a FOSS project (and it also reminds the action of opening the start menu...)
• "Legacy Start Menu"

[ge0rdi]

That's important not only to fulfill GitHub requirement but also for your own protection and for the one of the contributing members.

I think we just need organization account to not have this repo under one's personal user account. People are coming and leaving. So it could be hosted under some neutral account.

I don't think the intent is to go commercial on this one (at any point).

[ge0rdi]

https://help.github.com/articles/differences-between-user-and-organization-accounts/

Organizations are shared accounts where groups of people can collaborate across many projects at once.

[wcsh]

I would like to throw in my 2 cents if you don't mind. From what I gleam from Ivo's response is this. He wants to retain the "" ownership of the brand "Classic Shell" All this means as long as the new people taking it over don't want to monetize it, and just put in a line "Originally Created by …" that should suffice his wishes. However if you plan to monetize it then you would defiantly have to rename it, or work out a deal where Ivo would become a shareholder or something like that. My suggestion would be if you are going to monetize it "as you call it, Fork it" rename it and then alter the code and start with a new version number.

I really like the software completely, and use it on all my desktops and customers Desktops and all my servers. Its such a blessing to have had this come along.
If you all ever need assistance in getting this going again "i'm no programmer" I hope that there is someway I could help. There are so many different directions you can go with this little gem:)

[coddec]

@ge0rdi @XenHat

I would like to throw in my 2 cents if you don't mind. From what I gleam from Ivo's response is this. He wants to retain the "" ownership of the brand "Classic Shell" All this means as long as the new people taking it over don't want to monetize it, and just put in a line "Originally Created by …" that should suffice his wishes. However if you plan to monetize it then you would defiantly have to rename it, or work out a deal where Ivo would become a shareholder or something like that. My suggestion would be if you are going to monetize it "as you call it, Fork it" rename it and then alter the code and start with a new version number.

I really like the software completely, and use it on all my desktops and customers Desktops and all my servers. Its such a blessing to have had this come along.
If you all ever need assistance in getting this going again "i'm no programmer" I hope that there is someway I could help. There are so many different directions you can go with this little gem:)

Nice 2 cents from different perspective!

[coddec]

@wcsh
I won't monetize it :)
I guess @ge0rdi and @XenHat won't too

[XenHat]

@wcsh
I won't monetize it :)
I guess @ge0rdi and @XenHat won't too

Nope. It was free, it will continue to be free.
I've been on the user end of a few products that used to be free, only to turn into pay-to-use software and I don't wish to become what I hate. 😄

PS: Plus Classic Shell is the only completely free start menu replacement that doesn't feel cut-down so.. Why ruin that?

[coddec]

hahaha, TRUE!

[RogerSanders]

I think you should re-brand. The name "Classic Shell" is limiting, as it implies the project itself is somehow constrained to restoring/mimicking an "old" style of start menu. This extension can provide far more than that, experimenting with new and totally different start menu designs that have never existed before. Now that it's open source, I won't be at all surprised if you get people attempting to do just that. Even with the existing functionality, I bet many people configure layouts that aren't direct mirrors of old designs anyway. For example, I use classic shell to give me a trimmed down two-column start menu similar to Windows 7, but with the cascading menus from it like XP. The windows start menu has never been able to do that, and I think it's a better layout than anything Microsoft has ever produced. I don't use Classic Shell to restore old start menu behaviour, I use it to improve on the (currently abysmal IMO) Windows 10 behaviour. I don't care if what it provides is "classic" or not, I just want something usable.

Unfortunately "Power Shell" is taken, or I'd suggest that. Not sure "Power Start Menu" is quite as catchy, but I think you want a name implying it's an enhancement on the Windows start menu, not simply restoring an old version of it. For what it's worth, I also think the project should be constrained to the start menu only, as was briefly discussed above. You should split the other features into standalone tools if they're to be kept IMO. If we're doing that, the word "shell" doesn't really fit either, nor does the idea of preserving the "classic shell" branding if the product is splitting into bits. That's more reasons to re-brand.

[coddec]

Hum, good points here! 👍

[Aokromes]

Classic Shell Reborn :) on that way people trying to find Classic Shell will find new project. (it also can imply the classic shell is improved) :)

[auanasgheps]

I agree with Classic Shell Reborn!

[david-rahrer]

How about "Start Again" if you have to stay away from the original name entirely. FWIW, I've only ever used the start menu part as well.

[coddec]

@david-rahrer Added

[siana]

If at all possible, i'd prefer keeping the name or making a really trivial modification if demanded, like "Open Classic Shell", or if that isn't available, "Open Shell".

I don't feel that the wording "Classic Shell" is particularly limiting, unless classic Start menu is slated to be removed. I think regardless of any additional functionality that may grow on top eventually, the main draw will be a legacy start menu. And after all, if the project is not-for-profit in nature, you don't have to care about marketing, but about keeping existing users that happened to stumble on it and have grown to depend on it happy.

[blackcrack]

Or may Libre Classic Shell named ... *g*
Naa, the software iss original, the Name should stay original .. and now it is open source, so, what's the matter .. imho should stay original, also in name.
And if split, then Classic shell, Classic explorer and Classic IE and so on..

best regards
Blacky

[coddec]

Or may Libre Classic Shell named ... g
Naa, the software iss original, the Name should stay original .. and now it is open source, so, what's the matter .. imho should stay original, also in name.
best regards
Blacky

It's Ivo's will, so I guess we should respect him if we are using his work 👍

[blackcrack]

aye 👍

[GottZ]

so we can close this issue now and stay with classic shell? 💃

[coddec]

so we can close this issue now and stay with classic shell? 💃

Nah, based on Ivo's reply, strictly speaking, everyone who decide to develop based on his work should use a new name and left credit to him to indicate his previous work.

So we still NEED to come up with a new name.

[auanasgheps]

What's wrong with the winner of the poll, Classic Start? I like it.

[blackcrack]

humm, so.. this Classic start menu have a run like the "Millennium Falcon" from Star Wars so ,
why not named "Millennium Falcon menu" 💯 jaaaiiiiii.... wooowoohhoooo tziihh thiihh..
*giggle*

[SideToe]

Since there are several primary functions for this utility / software would it make since to have a name to the product family and separate names for the sub-products. This would align with the potential to separate portions of the code into their respective functions and separate maintenance.

An example for the name like the following;
Windows Enhancement Suite (WES)
WES: Start
WES: Explorer
WES: ...

I know that this breaks the linkage to the historical name Classic Shell but would allow for a name that better represents what the software actually does.

Thoughts?

[GottZ]

hm. why didn't anyone think of „Classic Menu“ yet?
after all, the start menu replacement is the core idea behind classic shell or am i wrong?

[Darthagnon]

I'd like to leave my vote for the name @david-rahrer suggested: "Start Again" - genius. As long as the name is always cited with a subtitle akin to "Based on Classic Shell, by Ivo Beltchev", it should show up in search queries, no?

[XenHat]

I do like "Start Again", however the current code has a Windows Explorer component, and the name wouldn't really fit unless we do something such as "Start Again: Explorer Plugin"

[david-rahrer]

I wasn't sure the Explorer portion was going to be kept, but I suppose it could be Start Again, Explorer Again - especially if they are split into separate packages. One day we may need Control Panel Again :( Otherwise, listing the Explorer Plugin under Start Again doesn't seem too bad. I would think the Explorer part might be harder to keep working as Windows changes, and for me it is less important (though someone else may depend on it). For me, anything but that awful Windows 10 start menu.

On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 7:14 PM Xenhat ***@***.***> wrote: I do like "Start Again", however the current code has a Windows Explorer component, and the name wouldn't really fit unless we do something such as "Start Again: Explorer Plugin" — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/db669b774a9677d1b4bff9694fa0907bd3da3e13?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fcoddec%2FClassic-Shell%2Fissues%2F13%23issuecomment-386464435&userId=1869741&signature=d40ced5fe497dae8>, or mute the thread <https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/f1bb76ccd65e4c972a18f3d4831d3faf6f2fafce?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FAAjpif9hErs2OUne0_wJ-fZtx8RQCyPdks5tu49wgaJpZM4R4wvU&userId=1869741&signature=18a99ead96feafee> .

-- David Rahrer

[blackcrack]

hm. why didn't anyone think of „Classic Menu“ yet?
after all, the start menu replacement is the core idea behind classic shell or am i wrong?

because they want with all might an other name they bumbatz .. instead
to hold the old good -known- name and want make all broken because of that,
because with the name it's all bull or baer and the well known name should stay
and this discussion should close and never open !

best regards
Blackcrack

[coddec]

The new name will be Classic Start.
Future development will be made here: https://github.com/passionate-coder/Classic-Start