Re: Renaming eglot -- or at least add an alias?

[Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>]

[[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider    ]]]
[[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies,     ]]]
[[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]

  > > I am reputed to be good at that.  nstead of telling me how hopeless it
  > > is, which won't convince me, how about telling me what Eglot does?
  > > Then we'll see if I come up with a more descriptive name.
  > >
  > No, I'm not the one pushing for the change.

I am not "pushing for the change" regardless of all advantages and
disadvantages.  Rather, I am pushing to look for possible better
names, and then make a decision based on whatever we find.

Isn't that clearly the right thing to do?  Won't you help us do it?

If we find no better name than "Eglot", we should use that one.  But
we should make a real try to find the best one.

    It is your responsibility to
  > actually understand what eglot is if your going to argue the name needs
  > changing.

That is a strange claom to make.

I argued that the name Eglot has a specific disadvantage: that it
doesn't mean anything to people like me who don't know what the
package does.  I don't have a "rasponsibility to understand what Eglot
is" to make _that_ point.

But I do need to understand what Eglot does in order to look
for possible better names.

-- 
Dr Richard Stallman (https://stallman.org)
Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org)
Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org)
Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)