Re: Next browser finally on master!

[Brett Gilio]

Ricardo Wurmus writes:

> Hi Pierre,
>
>>> I am also in favor
>>> of renaming SBCL-Next to something else. I know that we are using sbcl
>>> instead of clisp for building it, but the naming scheme seems to imply
>>> an SBCL library or module rather than a web browser application.
>>
>> This is being discussed for stumpwm in bug #33311. […]
>
> I’ve read that discussion, but I don’t see how it is relevant.
> The *name* of the package surely does not have any effect on the
> features, does it?
>
> For applications like StumpWM and Next we could change the package names
> to “stumpwm” and “next”, respectively.  That these packages can *also*
> be used as libraries does not mean that the packages should have names
> with the “sbcl-” or “cl-” or “other-lisp-” prefix.
>
> Am I misunderstanding something?

That was my understanding as well Ricardo. I do not see how renaming the
package would detach it from its respective compiler. It should still be
just as hackable in SLIME... Or so I thought?

Brett