Re: Naming guidelines for ELPA packages

[Jim Porter]

On 5/14/2023 4:00 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > I agree. This is mainly an attempt to help package maintainers pick good (or
> > "good enough") names on their own so that there's less time spent discussing
> > this issue, and also to be upfront about what the Emacs/ELPA maintainers
> > would prefer. That way, as a package maintainer, you can take these
> > guidelines into account (or not) before you even submit the package.
>
> Great.  Is there still something that needs to be resolved before we can
> add this package to NonGNU ELPA, then?

In my opinion, no. I only suggested 'devil-keys' as a compromise that 
could address the concerns people had about the name 'devil' not 
providing a hint about what the package does. (In this subthread, I 
mainly wanted to discuss whether we could come up with a general 
guideline to assist package authors in coming up with reasonably-good 
names.)

But then I'm not exactly an authority figure on what does and doesn't go 
into ELPA. :)