[Telepathy] How to name Ring.cx Telepathy Connection Manager

[George Kiagiadakis]

On 11.06.2016 10:51, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 11/06/16 08:35, George Kiagiadakis wrote:
>> On 06/10/2016 06:55 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/06/16 17:49, Stepan Salenikovich wrote:

[...]

>> 
>> #2 CM should not be named after the implementation because that can 
>> also
>> lead to confusion between the two projects (the telepathy CM and the
>> implementation software). See the example of telepathy-sofiasip that
>> became telepathy-rakia (mentioned in the spec as well). This is also a
>> factor against telepathy-ring (or telepathy-ring.cx perhaps) because
>> ring.cx is another software. You don't want users to think that this
>> telepathy CM is somehow part of ring.cx or it can be used to talk to
>> people only if they are using ring.cx on the other side. Maybe another
>> implementation will pop up in the future and then ring.cx will be
>> irrelevant as a name.
>> 
> 
> This is not so clear cut.
> 
> I chose the name telepathy-resiprocate for the resiprocate-based CM
> because telepathy-resiprocate is maintained in the reSIProcate 
> repository:
> 
> https://github.com/resiprocate/resiprocate/tree/master/apps/telepathy
> 
> Maybe an exception should be made so that when a CM is officially part
> of a protocol implementation (reSIProcate is a SIP implementation), 
> then
> it can use the name of the implementation.
> 

Hmm, by the rule this was probably a bad choice, but I can see how you 
mean it. Being part of the same project as the implementation maybe 
makes those arguments less strong. I guess it remains to be seen whether 
this will have the same problem as tp-sofiasip in the future.

I think that the spec is clear about that, though. Quote:
"Connection manager names SHOULD NOT be the same as the name of a 
library on which they are based."

Regards,
George