Re: Namespaces - summary, conclusion

[Philippe Vaucher]

> > Given this is more or less the position held by Alan, Eli, Richard,
> > Drew and João I think the chances of seeing new aliases is close to 0.
>
> This is not my conclusion.  I've seen several calls to move away from
> from discussing in the abstract to discuss specific, concrete
> examples.  I think this is a good idea, since IMHO the abstract
> discussion is likely exhausted.
>
> There is always the chance that some of the proposals will be voted
> down.  But also consider that some who have disagreed with you in the
> abstract might be more convinced by specific, concrete proposals.

So far the string- proposal got shot down entirely. The regexp one was
initially a no-go from Alan but I then Richard kinda liked it and
proposed adaptations.

@Stefan Monnier: I see that you talked about `multibyte-string-p`
already (and iirc that didn't went well. You talked earlier about
`process-`, maybe you'd like to propose some changes there?

I mean I'm willing to propose concrete changes but if it's not obvious
for string- and regexp- why would it be for other topics? Let's try
another topic just to see:

rename-file -> file-rename
delete-file -> file-delete
copy-file -> file-copy
expand-file-name -> file-expand-name

Do you think people will be ok with that?

Philippe