Is there a common lisp package naming convention?

I have created some of my own user packages and have run into a name clash.

In Java, the naming convention is to use your domain name in the package name: e.g. import com.example.somepackage;.

Are there any widely used package naming conventions for common lisp packages?

Regards,

Russell

From stackoverflow

• The convention I use is to use a unique word: salza, skippy, zs3, etc. I don't really try to have a direct relationship to the library functionality. I try to avoid generic words that others might use like "zlib" or "zip" or "png".

  Edi Weitz uses Frank Zappa-related words to name many of his packages: Hunchentoot, Drakma, etc.

  Some people use Java-style org.foo.bar reversed domain naming.

  So, the direct answer is no, there isn't a common, agreed-upon convention that everyone uses.

  Russell : Thanks for the answer. This confirms my observations from the few packages I've used -- except for the use of Frank Zappa related words :).

  felideon : Don't forget Drew Crampsie's backronyms such as lisp-on-lines.

  Luís Oliveira : I personally don't like dots in Lisp names.

• One convention that you see sometimes is packages which provide a thin compatibility wrapper over routinely implemented but non-standardized functionality are often called TRIVIAL-SOMETHING.

  This leads to some really wonderful names: the library for working with *FEATURES* in a implementation-independent way is called TRIVIAL-FEATURES; even better, the library for interacting with the garbage collector in a standardized way is called TRIVIAL-GARBAGE.