Don't use the name ipfs-npm for the module?

[achingbrain]

Follows on from #52

I have mixed thoughts about 'npm' being in the name of this module. We're all friends but it is the trademark of a private company. npm has become synonymous with the registry which helps discovery, but the npm registry itself is an implementation of a CommonJS Package Registry which can be used with yarn and whatever XYZ new registry tool.

At the very least, to comply with their trademark policy it should be ipfs-npm-registry but it's a bit of a mouthful so the previous name of registry-mirror seemed ok to me.

[daviddias]

Thank you for bringing this up, @achingbrain. Reading through the policy, it seems we would fall into the "OK" scenario given that it is a tool to improve npm and the module is not a business at all.

I'm open to hear new names or to move back to registry-mirror. I just feel that registry-mirror falls short on communicating that it is an IPFS power module. Some other ideas:

• ipfs-npm-registry (I kind of like this one, and then the CLI can have an extra short name, like inr)
• ipegistry
• ipnpm