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

[xenodasein]

> FWIW,
>
> The word "bikeshedding" often gets thrown around when someone tries to
> find ways of making Emacs easier to use.  I don't think that is the best
> approach.  Ease of use often comes down to minor details, in themselves
> not a big deal, but that taken together will start to add up.
>
> I also think the claim that naming doesn't matter is wrong.  Naming of
> user facing features *does* matter, especially of important features
> such as this one.  We have enough technical debt, quirks and historical
> baggage in Emacs as it is.

I completely agree, what is out of place is that since there seems to be
no desire to a unified naming scheme undertaking, and will probably never
be one as there will always be something more important than "just cleaning
things up" like emulating LibreOffice, only Eglot gets the ire of
inconsistencies, and all the previous packages and likely most future ones
will keep having unique names anyway, and this is not fair or nice.

> Several people have argued the renaming case effectively, and I haven't
> seen any need to add much beyond that.  But it's clear to me now that we
> haven't been able to find a significantly better name.  Given that there
> is also a lot of opposition to renaming, I think I agree that, on
> balance, it might be better to leave this alone.
>
> Long live Eglot.  I'm happy to see it merged.

So IMO if there is a problem it lies deeper and not on naming choice of
Eglot per se.