Re: [ELPA] New package: dape

[Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net>]

Hello Philip,

> In addition to this, there have on multiple occasions been authors
> who have been open and appreciative of names being suggested here on
> the mailing list, especially if they don't have a strong opinion wrt
> the name to begin with.  It seems unjustified to claim that
> mentioning the topic will necessarily scare people away.

Please don't misunderstand me.  I am not claiming that it will
necessarily scare people away.  I am claiming that the bikeshedding can
be discouraging to authors who consider submitting to GNU ELPA.  This
should not be surprising, as I don't think anyone would enjoy having to
endure a lengthy thread second-guessing their decision, which usually
seems to proceed with the assumption that the author hasn't already
spent time making it deliberately.

As well, I can go through the list of packages on GNU ELPA and find tens 
of them whose names don't bear any apparent relation to their purpose or 
description.  Should that stop us from seeking better names?  Of course 
not.  But at what point do we admit that Shakespeare was right?

> (I didn't want to bring this up initially, but one of the reasons I
> mentioned changing the name is due to the small edit distance between
> "dape" and "r*pe", that I can imagine would make other people more
> uncomfortable).

Well, let's see, in QWERTY order: tape, ape, gape, jape, cape, vape, 
nape...  I think that's not a practical reason to reject an author's 
name, and not a very polite association to make with the name he chose.