Package Naming Conventions

["BACH::GREEK" <greek%bach.decnet@hudson.dec.com>]

I believe that the simplest method of naming packages so that conflicts 
do not arise is to require every organization that produces Common LISP 
software to prefix their packages with an official (registered) 
organization name.  This seems unlikely.

Without such an agreement, we have to start coming up with special 
cases.  In addition to USER and LISP, we invent a SYSTEM package.  Then 
we start wondering about additional packages shipped with the base 
system, such as an editor or debugger or whatever.  So maybe we say that 
these packages must begin with SYSTEM-, or we say that they can have any 
name.  Now independent organizations can't be sure they won't step all 
over someone else's packages.  And so on.

I think we should either all agree that we will support a package naming 
convention that someone devises, or we might as well stop talking about 
naming conventions.

- Paul
------