Here it is, the official poll for the java package name of jme3.
Some people got irritated by the new “com.g3d” package name for jme3 which is a result of Kirill writing jme3 completely from scratch. Monkey became gorilla 
Until alpha, the package name (at least ;)) should be stable, so the community now has to decide what name it will be.
Remember, choosing “com.jme” as package name will make it harder to build tools that use both libraries to convert data from jme2 to jme3, so a name different than that is preferred by the developers. Still, we heard of many people who would like to see the familiar package name despite the problems that arise from that.
Also see this thread where the discussion started.
com.jme3 ?
I'm with the developers on this one. I just don't wanna see 'com.g3d' around any longer; it really makes no sense at all to anyone who wasn't around for the very first discussion we had about the new breed of JME3.
JME3 in its own right deserves some distinction from the original branches because of the immense from-scratch work by Momoko_Fan.
erlend_sh said:
JME3 in its own right deserves some distinction from the original branches because of the immense from-scratch work by Momoko_Fan.
Well... then doesn't this beg the question of (and I know I might be contradicting myself here) whether or not this "new" engine needs its own branding? If it is so completely new and different then why is it still hanging out at jME? For marketing purposes and exposure? What gives it the right to call itself jMonkeyEngine? It really sort of sounds like it might need the same sort of distinction that the devs for Ardor3D took when they went into the wilds and created their new engine (along with a new website, forums, etc.).
Dunno tho... I'm just sort of curiously rambling here... but I think the question is valid.
ashtonv said:
For marketing purposes and exposure? What gives it the right to call itself jMonkeyEngine?
1) yes, mostly, also the community of jme deserves more than an abandoned project
2) the former jMonkeyEngine developers and the fact that the creators come from the jme community
normen said:Normen pretty much hit it on the spot. The last thing the jME community needed after Ardor3D branched out was yet another branch to separate the community further. We all wanted the same thing; an even better Java game (-centered) engine.
ashtonv said:
For marketing purposes and exposure? What gives it the right to call itself jMonkeyEngine?
1) yes, mostly, also the community of jme deserves more than an abandoned project
2) the former jMonkeyEngine developers and the fact that the creators come from the jme community
For marketing purposes and exposure? What gives it the right to call itself jMonkeyEngine?
Hey it isn't that simple. It is still jME, on the front-end at least. The scene graph, math and bounding packages have been copied over from jME2 while many other parts are different. This has been discussed before already.. If you want improvements and a better engine, change must be made. If I simply copied jME2 over and worked from there, android support would have never been possible as well as many other things, not without breaking existing classes. Writing an engine from scratch allows you to make better decisions and learn from the mistakes the previous authors did, this is why I chose this way of developing jME3.
If you want to continue arguing in this way, then you should also ask why jME2 is called jME2, and not jME1.1 ..
Momoko_Fan said:
If you want to continue arguing in this way, then you should also ask why jME2 is called jME2, and not jME1.1 ..
jME2 is only called jME2 in the forums when identifying what version is being used -- as should be the case with jME3... at the Java package level it is still (and still should be) com.jme.
I really don't intend to ruffle dev-feathers here... really! I totally appreciate the new work, apparent results, and that other platform options (like Android) are being given their due attention. And for that, I thank you.
I suppose that I'm just somewhat of an idealist insofar as the package naming goes and would like to see a pure-line from 1.x to 3.x and beyond. At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter... it could be named anything... and so long as its good and relatively hassle free to use, it will be used.
Beyond this, and as a frolicking thought, why not propose to use the 3 from the new version and name in a more descriptive fashion... and say call the new branch com.jme3d and leave it at that. ;)
ashtonv said:
and say call the new branch com.jme3d and leave it at that. ;)
Added your suggestion to the poll. @all: the poll allows changing your vote!
I voted com.g3d but you can call it com.baboon if this helps the developers. I just want it :D.
So the current branche it "jme3" or is it the "mf_jme3test"? In the BuildJme3 entry at googlecode is described to use the second one but after the re-organisation it should be the first, shouldn't it? Maybe the entry at googlecode has to be changed
Custom said:
So the current branche it "jme3" or is it the "mf_jme3test"? In the BuildJme3 entry at googlecode is described to use the second one but after the re-organisation it should be the first, shouldn't it? Maybe the entry at googlecode has to be changed
its the jme3 one, bit messy right now, sorry
Alright so the general consensus is com.jme3, is that fine then?
ok for me.
Yep, let's call it done. com.jme3 it is; developers rejoice! 
erlend_sh said:
Yep, let's call it done. com.jme3 it is; developers rejoice! :P
And the democratic process puts yet another silly issue to rest!
Package named change is in SVN!
Thread locked. Soon to be unsticked.
Momoko_Fan said:
Package named change is in SVN!
Thread locked. Soon to be unsticked.
Yay! Gotta rename the physics and gde and upload as soon as possible!