Re: naming modules

[Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>]

> In summary, it seems that the nature of glue is more emulsifier than
> crystal, especially if there is a lot of glue involved.  I advocate
> support for arbitrary "views" over registration of one "view".  The
> latter (unfortunately) turns me off big time. :-(

This worries me; I don't want to piss off Guile's contributors.
There's no way Guile's going anywhere if it's just me.

A renaming system would allow someone to resolve conflicts on their
individual machine, but I don't see how this could support the "untar;
configure; make install" model or the RedHat/Debian package model.
How will a module find the other modules it needs, without human
intervention?

I sympathize with your crystal/emulsifier analogy, but I don't think
what we're proposing will affect the way anyone codes, or even the way
they organize their code.  We're just setting aside a portion of the
namespace that we want to try to keep neat.

Maybe I don't understand your objection...