Re: ELPA submission: plz-see

[Stefan Kangas]

Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes:

> In the case of plz.el, all the obvious names for Elisp HTTP libraries
> were already taken (url, http, request, web).  I spent a good deal of
> time thinking about and choosing the name.  Then, when I submitted the
> package to ELPA (after having developed it for a few years), the
> alternatives suggested were long and awkward. [...]
>
> Were one of the obvious names available, I would have used it at the
> time; since none were, I chose what was the best in my judgment.

FWIW, I'm not always a huge fan of packages taking the "obvious" names.
I'd prefer it if we could mostly reserve those for features in core.

For example, we were unable to rename `eglot' to `lsp' when we moved it
to core, as the name was already "taken".  So now users that want LSP
enabled in Emacs can't say `M-x lsp'.