chore: name the proxy after the project it proxies - #30
Merged
Merged
Conversation
The MCP server identifier carried a person's codename. Someone reading the adapter README has no way to know that chinatsu-memory and mneme are the same thing -- the name told them nothing and hinted at something private. This costs existing users nothing: the mcp_servers key is one they chose themselves and codex resolves locally, the proxy never reads it, and serverInfo is not used for routing. Configs already in place keep working; the README now says so explicitly. Renaming gets more expensive the longer the name is out there, which is the argument for doing it now rather than later. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The MCP server identifier in
adapters/codex-recovery-proxy/carried a personal codename. Someone reading that README has no way to know it andmnemeare the same thing — the name told them nothing, and hinted at something internal.This costs existing users nothing. I said the opposite in #29 and was wrong to be that cautious; on a closer read:
[mcp_servers.<name>]key is one the user picks themselves — the proxy never reads itserverInfo.nameis not used for routing by any clientRenaming gets more expensive the longer a name is out in the world, which is the argument for doing it now rather than later.
Kept separate from #29 on purpose: that one is mechanical cleanup, this one is a naming call that is yours to make. Either can land without the other.