<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Korakurider <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:korakurider@gmail.com" target="_blank">korakurider@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex"> <div>On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 6:48 AM, David Farning <<a href="mailto:dfarning@sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">dfarning@sugarlabs.org</a>> wrote:<br> > There has been some talk of what the final name for aslo should be.<br> ><br> > <a href="http://addons.sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">addons.sugarlabs.org</a><br> > or<br> > <a href="http://activities.sugarlabs.org" target="_blank">activities.sugarlabs.org</a><br> ><br> > Which do you prefer?  I like activities.sl.o better but it means more<br> > work for me to change it. So, for me, it is a wash.<br> <br> </div>  Why do we have to choose one from only these?<br>  Both options have good justification,  so I think having a couple of<br>  DNS entry and<br>  redirect to one to another would be great.<br></blockquote><div><br>Because this, while technically possible to implement, creates brand and user confusion. </div></div><br>-- <br>Luke Faraone<br><a href="http://luke.faraone.cc" target="_blank">http://luke.faraone.cc</a><br>