Me too. I think this is a good idea and like the name as it clearly denotes “protocol”.
On Apr 6, 2016, at 21:36, Vipul Rahane <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree as well. > >> On Apr 6, 2016, at 8:44 PM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> 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 >>
