Issue: REQUIRE-PATHNAME-DEFAULTS (Version 3)

[gz@spt.entity.com (Gail Zacharias)]

   Date: Fri, 11 Nov 88 17:21:53 EST
   From: Dan L. Pierson <pierson@mist>
   If REQUIRE is removed from the standard language you can continue to
   provide it as an implementation extension and tell your users anything
   you want.

That's exactly right.  I have no objections to removing REQUIRE from the
language.  What I have problems with is leaving it in the language while (a)
breaking *all* current uses of it (since by definition (CLtL p.188) current
usage means loading) and (b) putting restrictions on the ability of
implementations to continue supporting current usage as an extension.