Brian's Waste of Time

Tue, 23 Aug 2005

TTMP/Stomp feedback

Hmm, got a fair chunk of feedback in the mere seven hours since I talked about the name change telling me not to do it! Mostly it boiled down to "TTMP sounds like a protocol, Stomp doesn't." Though most folks put it more eloquently.

I was shocked, I didn't realize people felt strongly already. Okay, chance for feedback =)

My thought is that Stomp is more memorable and less likely to be confused with smtp, http, etc in the ears of folks who think "r freaking clue?" when they hear RFC. As was pointed out to me, sounding like a protocol name is not a bad thing for a protocol, on the other hand. Other names considered included tomp (which does a nice stomp for the ssl wrapped version), stmp (which is far too close to smtp for my taste), and Johan (my generic name, like Bob).

The best benefit of stuff still in development is that it is malleable. Seriously, some feedback is appreciated and I'll hold the ax off on the name change for a bit -- names are important. I won't go through months of wiki voting (a la echo/atom) for a current developer community of four though =)

On the other hand, is it good when the unsolicited feedback "the name change is a bad idea" outweighs unsolicited technically feedback 3:1? Either we're doing something right with the protocol, or... ? Regardless, I love unsolicited feedback, period, as it means people care enough to step forward!

1 writebacks [/src/ttmp] permanent link