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

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   > To be fair, eglot does a bit more than just being a LSP client.  It
   > enables lots of extra fluff.  E.g., it popups up a docstring in the
   > mini-buffer using eldoc, it highlights broke code using flymake,
   > enables completion using company-mode if that is used, etc -- that is
   > quite a bit more than just a simple client interface.

   It provides LSP client services to several Emacs features, yes.
   Having a client without this glue would be much less useful, because
   it would mean we'd need to develop that ourselves.

Right, my point was mearly that eglot isn't _just_ a client -- so
whatever name is derived from that wouldn't be a good fit, since it
does much more as well.