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

[Richard Stallman]

[[[ 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. ]]]

  > > 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..

I agree with you about that.  The idea of calling it "LSP" did not
come from me; that is not a particularly helpful name, anyway.  Most
users won't know what that means.  I said so in the message you're
replying to.

What I argue for is that we should give it a name that clearly says
what job it does.  There are many ways to do that.

  > 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.

I agree, but I think we're miscommunicating.


Can anyone suggest a way to describe the job that Eglot does, NOT
using technical jargon, or implementation details such as "LSP"?
Would the word "parse" be good?  "Code-analyze"?
I never used Eglot so I don't know what it does.




-- 
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)