Renaming time #1172

New issue

Open

opened 2025-12-28 17:22:03 +00:00 by sami · 2 comments

sami commented

2025-12-28 17:22:03 +00:00

Owner

Originally created by @carpawell on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023).

I'm always frustrated when i see the same thing named two different ways.

Describe the solution you'd like

neofs-node -> neofs-storage everywhere
morph client -> ???
sidechain/morph -> neofs chain

Describe alternatives you've considered

Do nothing cause we may break something.

Originally created by @carpawell on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023). ## Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. I'm always frustrated when i see the same thing named two different ways. ## Describe the solution you'd like 1. `neofs-node` -> `neofs-storage` everywhere 2. `morph` client -> ??? 3. `sidechain`/`morph` -> `neofs chain` ## Describe alternatives you've considered Do nothing cause we may break something.

sami added the

discussion

documentation

labels

2025-12-28 17:22:03 +00:00

sami commented

2025-12-28 17:22:03 +00:00

Author

Owner

@roman-khimov commented on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023):

These are very different things. node->storage is mostly blocked by potential compatibility issues. morph client isn't really needed. fs chain can be renamed right away.

@roman-khimov commented on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023): These are very different things. node->storage is mostly blocked by potential compatibility issues. `morph` client isn't really needed. fs chain can be renamed right away.

sami commented

2025-12-28 17:22:03 +00:00

Author

Owner

@carpawell commented on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023):

morph client isn't really needed

Do you know what is it?

fs chain can be renamed right away

"sidechain" wording used in logs. Why is it better to do this than binary renaming? Both are smth that can be used by a user. Well, binary is more probable but still.

@carpawell commented on GitHub (Dec 21, 2023): > morph client isn't really needed Do you know what is it? > fs chain can be renamed right away "sidechain" wording used in logs. Why is it better to do this than binary renaming? Both are smth that _can_ be used by a user. Well, binary is more probable but still.