According to the information in the current ebuild  and the content in the project's homepage  The name of this package is ecl no ecls. So it would be more correct to change its name and things would be easier for building some packages (like cl-unicode) since the package's name (ecls) and the package's binary differ in name. Besides, common-lisp-3.eclass assumes that CommonLisp packages and binaries have the same name (this is not true for ecls).
I've performed a search in the tree to see where this package is referenced and I've found the following packages affected:
It's referenced in use masks too (for instance in profiles/base/use.mask), so I think is not big deal to rename it.
Andrei, I CC you because you where the last to bump the ecls package.
I agree that renaming this package will make life easier. The executable name is ecl, the tarball is ecl-16.1.2.tgz.
But there are many such packages. For clozurecl the executable name is ccl, the tarball is ccl-1.11-<platform>.tar.gz. So, this package, logically, should be ccl.
For cmucl the executable name is lisp (the tarball is cmucl-*.tar.bz2 though). So, other packages have to live with <executable> != <package_name>.
Renaming ecls -> ecl (and maybe clozurecl -> ccl) will require renaming the corresponding USE flags, changing a number of files in profiles, partial rewriting and revbumping a number of ebuilds. Some of them are stable. Stabilization after revbump will take an unpredictably long time (especially for ppc for which maxima-5.34.1 is stable). Probably many months (stabilization bug for maxima-5.37.3-r4 was files in January, still no reaction from ppc, and x86 also not done yet). Until that moment in a far future packages with old names (ecls, clozurecl) cannot disappear from the tree. What will be the status in the transition period (half a year or more) - both ecl and ecls in the tree, 2 sets of USE flags, etc.?
The purpose of this change is to make the package name the same as the upstream project, which changed name from ECLS to ECL a few years ago.
It's *NOT* to make the package name and executable name the same. All other projects are mostly fine the way they are: Clozure's official executable wrapper is named "ccl", CMUCL's is "lisp", etc... The only nitpick might be that "clozurecl" should probably be named simply "clozure".
OK. But, as I said, maxima-5.34.1 is stable on amd64, ppc, x86. Until it disappears from the tree, the package ecls cannot disappear. And this may take any time from a few months to infinity.