| > Some kind of 'grafting' or 'mounting' scheme would be needed to bring a | > package into the package namespace. | | I disagree that this necessarily mandates a grafting or mounting | scheme. Whilst it might be useful, even desirable, it is a separate | question. I agree that it's a separate question. Hence (b) of my message. If you want to import module A from package P and import module A from package Q into a single module M of a program, you can always do this: make a new module AP, that imports A and re-exports it all; compile AP with package P visible and Q hidden ditto for AQ make M say "import AP; import AQ" That's essentially what you suggested. Of course it means that any "import A.B.C" has to be understood wrt a namespace that may change from module to module. I guess that one merit of the grafting scheme is that you could make a single package-grafting configuration that would apply to the whole of a program, so that within that program modules were consistently and uniquely named. But yes it's a separate question. Simon