std.uni vs std.unicode and beyond?

[Brad Anderson]

On Wednesday, 22 May 2013 at 17:31:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Of course we can provide a migration path, but you're still 
> talking about
> breaking code, and I don't think that std.uni is a bad enough 
> name to merit
> that.

More specifically, what I'm wondering is whether or not it's 
considered a breaking change if your code still compiles and 
works exactly as it did before except for perhaps a deprecation 
warning during the build?

I could be misunderstanding what the proposed public import 
solution would accomplish but it sounded like std.uni could be 
upgraded with Dmitry's improvements while getting a new module 
name that is easier for newcomers to find.  It sounded like 
win-win to me.