From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: library/package filename prefixes Date: Mon, 04 May 2020 11:49:03 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83eerzojqj.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="13013"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: rms@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 04 17:53:01 2020 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 1jVdOu-0003ER-Pp for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 17:53:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37886 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVdOt-0002pZ-RT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 11:52:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35826) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVdLB-0005NQ-To for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 May 2020 11:49:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:7110) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jVdLA-0001bJ-Cw; Mon, 04 May 2020 11:49:08 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AB57C80E01; Mon, 4 May 2020 11:49:06 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AB5A580B90; Mon, 4 May 2020 11:49:04 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1588607344; bh=g61MPT18qp4m4K/Ih6lAzOybfT1dgNfWgTkRvbOc91k=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZCN0988Mad5mT8KxzQRletoCPwj/raPGI/4J4d0zWVn32lO+jPoU0O4del35TU50x xhvQfBQAdazht+6kUhLjG16s/Jj001ofGfzFkzLfWCdNAC4MOPABOuL2eeeP4JTClV FyFJhgF/9DMOwcYi1LUamuxTWxlVgydSHGQDmlJQLN9Bqn3pBYem03J77jdSMuX/7z VkScPMi1WEnDV0t2eNT6wir0+q6TQcUPZsd+WmGb/xsNaUnPZuZv3SZPWpVa4Cvmk0 ia1benaNzQntl67vyfhPs6t8FnEAnsG+yFYEFz0GcKkBgt/6KMp5VWfpoAlCPYhYu7 LViAO5CNZEZTg== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.3.202]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69D3D12028A; Mon, 4 May 2020 11:49:04 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83eerzojqj.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 04 May 2020 17:30:44 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/04 11:09:38 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:248853 Archived-At: > I see no reason to rename the prefixes of pp, gv, and po. They are > all accepted acronyms. Also, the consensus seems to be that re- is a > good prefix, so why not those? > > If we don't rename the prefixes, there's no need to rename the files. I'm biased since I'm responsible for the `gv` prefix, but just in case: I fully agree. Maybe we should discourage short prefixes, but I don't think there's a need to go and rename existing ones. Also the fact that there are very few of them suggests that maybe it's not that important to explicitly discourage them (other factors already seem to discourage it). Stefan