From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Renaming eglot -- or at least add an alias? Date: Sat, 01 Oct 2022 10:51:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83pmfdduix.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="21847"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 01 16:53:03 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oedrS-0005Of-5n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2022 16:53:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60018 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oedrR-0000Jt-05 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2022 10:53:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43704) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oedpz-00080i-Po for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Oct 2022 10:51:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:42474) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oedpt-0001UN-P3; Sat, 01 Oct 2022 10:51:30 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 20103440C4A; Sat, 1 Oct 2022 10:51:24 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 99611440714; Sat, 1 Oct 2022 10:51:22 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1664635882; bh=Mw70V5OiJv8/U0B/ct33TwVcWiUswh3OH4iwRa8g7nc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=ZGlrPBXjnEle9xgrJOmepNhYN3DX0SXeRX1ipYbEc9ClDEjboBJxngCDuWarkjVMA +iAl+RqK9lXhUhXSY9qk7OyFPDThlrIPTuLP6TvK5jrOGevEcsmaqMuTAVbI/qoIfN 3GrRnI/rUy2Bd441uk7sn9kQcsbygZFzy039dWPEzrmDy87ntl+QWK3A+cnQFKIelV G34ZJWcj7D0VyG8OEGhSNeaLwhOMelQI7Qk/xMGORP2lSnksGdpj/+DjxkOnXAn0fv 2jAC1bKi8C6yc6GY8pu+gEz5WvSYehPIkOno2lRWRJ9Qzvd9PrCNBih28ftZCWWsxK h/PWlAyr44UFA== Original-Received: from pastel (65-110-220-202.cpe.pppoe.ca [65.110.220.202]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6BA85120EE3; Sat, 1 Oct 2022 10:51:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Sat, 01 Oct 2022 05:28:53 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:296548 Archived-At: > > Sorry, no. We will not start a dispute about renaming eglot, because > > that would delay its merge, and we don't have time for that luxury. > > We want eglot to be part of Emacs 29. > > We can make this decision in a week. > > Now, before including a package in Emacs, is the last good time > to choose a helpful name. I don't see any reason why Emacs has to follow Apple's footsteps and call one of its MUAs "Mail", one of its LSP clients "LSP", etc.. Emacs is about choice, so while as Emacs maintainers we do spend a fair bit of time trying to consolidate the various options out there so as to reduce the need for users to make choices, we should force packages to be named after their functionality, since that leads to inevitably more name conflicts. And in the present case, for *very* little benefit since the name "LSP" is not nearly as widely known as you might expect: most users don't look for an "LSP client" (because they have no idea what is "LSP") but they look for some way to get maybe some "IDE functionality" or "code completion" or things like that. Stefan