RE: epa command names

[Drew Adams]

> I'd much rather make M-x a bit more permissive 
> such that M-x mail-encrypt falls back to epa-mail-encrypt
> (probably via completion).
> 
> One way is something along the lines of the `substring' 
> completion-style (which we could restrict to substrings
> that start after a word boundary), but I think we'd want
> something less general.
> 
> I'm thinking of a way for packages to say "if `mail-encrypt' 
> is matched by the user's input, then include `epa-mail-encrypt'
> in the list of completion candidates".  This would handle
> conflicts very straightforwardly since if we have a second rule
> "if `mail-encrypt' is matched by the user's input, then include
> `superduper-mail-encrypt' in the list of completion candidates"
> M-x mail-encrypt TAB would simply provide both options as valid
> completion candidates.

You had one problem.  And now you have two...

(No, I will say no more.  Just going on record.)