> What's wrong with e.g. "The IPFS DHT was using Kademlia and is now using Coral"?
Because that’s not what is happening.
The Kademlia-like DHT is not going away. It just has a name (“Amino”) so you can refer to its as an implementation relative to other implementations that will coexist, not necessarily replace, the original.
> The result is that there are now more names for the same thing, and the old names have changed.
They gave a name to a thing that didn’t have a formal name, because it can compete with other implementations. Having distinct names for a service and an implementation isn’t uncommon. The only criticism is that they didn’t do it sooner.
All of this seems pretty academic. The majority of developers and vast majority of users won’t know or care about the branding or abstractions allowing for different implementations. The tools work the way they did, hopefully faster. That’s it.
Because that’s not what is happening.
The Kademlia-like DHT is not going away. It just has a name (“Amino”) so you can refer to its as an implementation relative to other implementations that will coexist, not necessarily replace, the original.
> The result is that there are now more names for the same thing, and the old names have changed.
They gave a name to a thing that didn’t have a formal name, because it can compete with other implementations. Having distinct names for a service and an implementation isn’t uncommon. The only criticism is that they didn’t do it sooner.
All of this seems pretty academic. The majority of developers and vast majority of users won’t know or care about the branding or abstractions allowing for different implementations. The tools work the way they did, hopefully faster. That’s it.