I agree as well.
> On Apr 6, 2016, at 8:44 PM, "p...@wrada.com" <p...@wrada.com> wrote: > > I like the idea of having different names. I think nmp is fine for the > protocol. > >> On 4/6/16, 7:24 PM, "Christopher Collins" <ccoll...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Hello all, >> >> There are two things called "newtmgr": >> >> 1. A simple command-response protocol used for interfacing with mynewt >> devices (the newtmgr server code is at core:libs/newtmgr). >> 2. A CLI tool which communicates with mynewt devics via the newtmgr >> protocol >> (newt:newtmgr). >> >> I have had a hard time discussing both of these entities due to the >> overloaded name. In the interest of preventing an endless series of >> "who's on first" fiascos, I propose we rename the name of the protocol. >> >> I suggest we rename the protocol to: nmp. I don't really care about the >> name, though, as long as it is unique :). >> >> Alternatively, the tool could be renamed, but I thought newtmgr sounds >> more like a tool than a protocol. >> >> Thanks, >> Chris >
