Re: [cedet-eieio] Cleaning up the EIEIO namespace

On 02/19/2013 02:49 PM, David Engster wrote:
> Stefan Monnier writes:
>> For the CL package we solved this problem by leaving the "cl.el" package
>> as a "compatibility package" only required by the packages that haven't
>> been updated to use the new names.  CL was so widely used that it will
>> take a *long* time to get rid of all uses of the old names, whereas
>> EIEIO's use is not as pervasive, so we don't necessarily have to do the
>> same for it.
>> This said, maybe it would make sense to move "eieio.el" to "cl-eieio.el"
>> (with clean names, autoloaded from cl-lib) and then make eieio.el
>> into a simple compatibility package full of aliases.
>
> What to do with the other files like eieio-base then? We cannot rename
> it to cl-eieio-base.el because of name clashes, but it also provides
> part of the public, CLOS-like functions.

There is nothing in eieio-base from CLOS.  Those are all just handy 
base-classes / concepts that I used elsewhere in CEDET.

> To summarize the options so far:
>
> 1) Prefix everything with eieio- and be done with it. Create obsolete
>     aliases for the old names and get rid of them "soon" (Emacs
>     25?). Alternatively, create an eieio-compat package with aliases for
>     the old names.
>
> 2) Prefix everything with eieio- and create cl- aliases for the
>     CLOS-like functionality. Those aliases may be defined in
>
>     2a) the eieio* files itself, or
>     2b) in a separate cl-whatever.el file.
>
>     As in 1), define obsolete aliases for the old names or use a compat
>     package.
>
> 3) Rename eieio to cl-eieio with clean names (i.e., eieio- and
>     cl-prefixes), autoloaded from cl-lib, and make eieio.el a simple
>     compatibility package full of aliases.
>
> I'm currently pretty much tied on "2b)+compat package" and 3).

I am fine with most of these ideas, but agree with David that option 3 
is pretty good.

Eric