Naming conventions for imports in GRASS codebase

[pmav99]

There is a great deal of variation in the way that grass code does imports. Just a few examples:

import grass.script as core
import grass.script as gcore
import grass.script as grass
import grass.script as gs
import grass.script as gscript
import grass.script as sgrass

import grass.script.core as core
import grass.script.core as gcore
import grass.script.core as grass
import grass.script.core as gscore

import grass.script.raster as grast
import grass.script.raster as raster

import grass.pygrass.utils as gutils
import grass.pygrass.utils as utils

import grass.lib.gis as gislib
import grass.lib.gis as libgis

I think it would be a good idea if a certain style was picked and consistently used throughout the codebase.

[sbl]

Sounds very reasonable to me and should also apply to addons. That might make it a bit easier for new addon-devs.

A way to import, that can be applied at all levels while avoiding potential conflicts with other libraries would be to add a g before the names of the imported components, as it has been practice in many cases:

import grass.script as gscript
import grass.script.core as gcore
import grass.pygrass.utils as gutils

A respective guideline should be added to: ​https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/Submitting/Python

[pmav99]

TBH, apart from:

import grass.script as grass
import grass.script.core as grass

which I seriously dislike, I don't have any strong opinions on the matter. I agree though that @sbl's suggestion is probably the most reasonable approach.