@danceratopz before I go further down this path, is this what we're aiming for to address ethereum/execution-specs#1402 ?

Thanks for getting on this @kclowes. I think we should hold off with this and the other renamings until

* #2152

is merged as it touches almost every source file and we'll have a lot of conflicts and a hard time rebasing.

If in the meantime you could take a holistic view to naming in ethereum-execution and see if it makes sense that would help. What I mean is, does the namespacing in the package make sense at all :) In particular:

1. Wdyt about the path `src/ethereum_spec_tests/ethereum_test_base_types` as there's a lot of "ethereum" and "test" in those paths ))

2. After this change we'll have `ethereum_test_cli` and `ethereum_clis`. Is this unambiguous enough?

I think it'd be helpful to do a build of ethereum-execution in EELS and check the namespacing as it currently is to see if it makes sense.

We should also keep this renaming in mind: #2133.

Hey @kclowes! In the meantime, the mass formatting PR has been merged:

• chore: shorten docstrings and single-line comments to 79 (ruff w505: doc-line-too-long) #2180

as has Felix's other module renaming PR:

• chore(all): rename shadowed modules to enable ruff a005 #2133

But I think we should look at the "total package", before proceeding :) Would you be willing to pick up this up? 🙏
#2209

I think it'd be go ok to close this PR and start PRing this once we have agreement on the package layout.

Yep, will close this and put up a proposal to talk about next week in #2209. Thanks!