[Admin] hosting the UBF-in-CL project

[Erik Enge]

Miles Egan <miles at caddr.com> writes:

> Obvious seems better than precise in this case.

Heh, yeah, exactly, and to my ear "rfc2822" is obvious whereas "internet
message format" isn't.  Ah, a classic problem this.  :-)

But let me make something clear: I don't /really/ care what the
convention is.  I do care that there is a convention and if we all can
agree on one I'll happily follow it (I'll even rename my rfc2822
package).

So, is our plan so far: cl- for wrappers around libraries; proper nouns
are preferable; RFCs use a shortned version of their title?

Erik.