RE: library/package filename prefixes

[Drew Adams]

>   > FWIW, I proposed a minimum of 2 chars (plus hyphen).
>   > I think that's good.  What's a good reason for going
>   > to 3 instead of 2?
> 
> The namespace of 2-letter prefixes seems somewhat cramped to me.
> Every package that uses such a prefix will have to be discussed
> regarding whether it is entitled to one.

I thought we were (I was, anyway, in my suggestion)
talking about the Elisp code conventions, which serve
as a guide to 3rd-party code, not just to code that's
to be included as an official part of Emacs.

In that 3rd-party-code case, there's no "have to be
discussed".  The idea, wrt 3rd-party code, was to
avoid having people create libraries with a prefix
like `s-' (not to mention just `-').

> A rule saying "use at least three" would not cause
> any real trouble and would mostly eliminate that problem.

(I still think 2 is OK.)

There are already libraries that have 2-char prefixes.
That existence is not a big consideration, but I don't
think 2-char prefixes cause any harm.

There's room for quite a few 2-char prefixes.  There
are, I guess, very few existing libraries with 1-char
prefixes.  And dash.el is the only library with a
0-char prefix (obviously - only one such library is
possible, hence the too-clever-by-half).

Anyway, not very important - just one (minor) opinion.