[cltl3-devel] RFC: CLtL3 Charter

[Robert Uhl]

Gustavo <gugamilare at gmail.com> writes:
>
> It will not change function or macro names nor create new names or
> aliases for them in some other package, even if the new names are more
> descriptive or acceptable.

That seems unnecessarily restrictive.  What's wrong with a COMMON-LISP-3
package which has more orthogonal names?  Heck, it could even take
advantage of some theoretical versioned-package functionality.

-- 
Robert A. Uhl
I take great delight at jeering at overly healthy types and telling 
them that they're going to feel really stupid one day, lying in a 
bed dying of nothing.                                        --GB