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

[Stefan Monnier]

>   > 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