The Coq mailing list

[Derek Dreyer <dreyer AT mpi-sws.org>]

Personally, I would support changing the name *and* the logo.

The root problem is the name -- I rather doubt the logo would be
controversial if it were not for the name.  As is well known, the name
was deliberately intended partly as a joke, to provoke people -- it
has succeeded in that regard.  But mostly at this point it is just
embarrassing to a lot of us, and probably exacerbates the gender
disparity in Coq users.

I have heard people say that it is hard to change the name.  I agree,
it is hard, but that doesn't mean IMO that it's not worth exploring.
I bet that many Coq users would be very open to a name change if a
catchy new name were proposed by the Coq team.  I would, for one.
(And I'm happy to help brainstorm about new names privately if anyone
cares to have that discussion.)  Of course, perhaps I am wrong: it
might be worth polling Coq users about whether they would like to see
the name changed, if that has not been done already.

That said, if there is not sufficient support for changing the name, I
would at least support changing the logo to something that is less
open to interpretation and more clearly resembles a normal rooster (or
even Ilya's steampunk rooster).

Best regards,
Derek


On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 6:49 PM James R Wilcox <jrw12 AT cs.washington.edu> wrote:
>
> I had never noticed this before, despite apologizing for the name of the 
> proof assistant to my students for many years. This year, I had a student 
> point out to me the
>
>> flesh-colored logo with what looks like a mushroom top
>
>
> and now I can't unsee it.
>
> Isn't it time for a new logo?
>
> James R. Wilcox
> University of Washington, Seattle