Hacker News Reader

Comment by EGreg | Hacker News Reader

I've open-sourced one part of our company's Q framework -- the library we use on the front end.

It contains a lot of stuff that took us a while to design and write and test on all browsers. If you wind up using it, I would love to hear your feedback. Ask me any questions if you get stuck. You can also contact me here: http://qbix.com/about

View on HN

There's a very well-known JS library already named "Q", here: https://github.com/kriskowal/q

I'd suggest a name change.

Yeah, this was very confusing. I thought this was some kind of extension to that library at first.

This is the Q.js I thought they were talking about at first too. I second a name change.

Well, we started about 2 years ago and our company's been calling it Q internally. This is just the front end SDK for what we built (Q spans PHP, Node.js and front end css/js.) I think we're going to keep the name.

This is the biggest piece of feedback you have gotten yet. Q isn’t nearly as famous as e.g. Backbone or Ember or Modernizr, but it is established and well-known. Your name is actually a barrier to this catching on, I think.

What if ours becomes better known? As I said we've started 2 years ago.

You may have started two years ago but you only open sourced it for the community two hours ago.

Even if that was somehow relevant (it doesn't really matter what you called it internally if you didn't use the name publicly), the existing Q.js is older!

Here is the first public version, from 3 years ago: https://github.com/Gozala/q/tree/v0.1.0

This is where you ask yourself "would I like if someone releases a product with the exact same name as my company's and moved us to the second page of Google?".

that is a bit childish. the time you began development is not relevant, and seeing as q.js is already popular, it is safe to say it will stay that way. changing the name is great advice. consider it.

You are throwing your work away by giving it the same name as an already established JS library.

OK sorry let me put it another way ... the larger library is meant to run on PHP and Node.js, and the Q.js and front end part is just the SDK to use it on a web browser. So when the whole thing is released, it will mostly be a PHP+Node.JS+Web library.

As a long time user of the original Q (which has been around since at least 2009 [1]), I'd also suggest picking a different name for another reason: searchability.

[1] https://github.com/kriskowal/q/commit/9191ce4c803cc3f8a01fb6...

http://qbix.com/contact doesn't point to anything.

Maybe this http://qbix.com/about#contact

Sorry - it's /about

You should add a redirect from /contact. http://alanhogan.com/url-as-ui

Reply on news.ycombinator.com