[pdimitar]

As a guy who made a career out of Elixir (7 years now, though I have mixed and matched that with quite a bit of Rust and some Golang) I could not agree more on the confusing "process" moniker.

My point was that calling packages "cheeses" and "wheels" was a conscious decision on the part of the Python community and apparently nobody stopped to think if it does not introduce friction or make them look unprofessional.

As you pointed out, Erlang's "process" moniker came from a long long time ago and they have a good reason for it. Python though? 10 years ago many of these problems were well-understood already.

Again, my argument is against cutesy quirky names. I get you that the generic "package" name carries some assumptions with it but IMO that's the more worthy battle to fight: to make sure everyone understands the same thing when "package" is mentioned.

(EDIT: All that being said, Erlang could have indeed used a quirky name because what they have doesn't seem to have its own term yet. And it doesn't exist anywhere else I think.)