Re: library/package filename prefixes

[Stefan Monnier]

> I see no reason to rename the prefixes of pp, gv, and po.  They are
> all accepted acronyms.  Also, the consensus seems to be that re- is a
> good prefix, so why not those?
>
> If we don't rename the prefixes, there's no need to rename the files.

I'm biased since I'm responsible for the `gv` prefix, but just in case:
I fully agree.  Maybe we should discourage short prefixes, but I don't
think there's a need to go and rename existing ones.  Also the fact that
there are very few of them suggests that maybe it's not that important
to explicitly discourage them (other factors already seem to discourage it).


        Stefan