Re: Renaming eglot -- or at least add an alias?

[Payas Relekar]

>> Now that we're getting closer to merging eglot, I think it is our last
>> chance to (re-)consider that "eglot" is not the ideal name.  It has some
>> charm, of course, but it is quite non-descriptive and it's hard (read:
>> impossible) to understand what it does based on the name alone.[1]
>
> I can only agree.  Especially because there are a number of packages
> starting with "el...", which makes misreading the package name as
> "elgot" very easy (which is still how I pronounce the package when
> speaking to this day).
>
>> As for names, lsp-mode would be the obvious choice, but some other
>> package has occupied that prefix (too bad).  I therefore propose
>> renaming it to elsp-mode and using the elsp-* prefix for it.
>>
>> At the very least, we should consider adding some alias, like
>> `start-lsp', and/or `lsp-start'.[2]
>
> I think that even using the word "lsp" suffers from the same issue, as a
> lot of people still have no idea what LSP is (even if they are using
> it).  I don't have a better suggestion but maybe mentioning the word
> "intelligence" or "ide" would be better.

How about intellisense? Asking because Microsoft does own the trademark,
and I'm not sure if we can use it for similar product.

elsp-mode, while terse is not the first thing one might think.
codesense, codesmart or some such might be better.
--