Data.Graph vs. FGL

[Abraham Egnor]

I'm doing a little cleanup on FGL
(http://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~erwig/fgl/haskell/).  Part of that
includes renaming modules to fit the hierarchical scheme; my plan was to
call the base Data.Graph.  Lo and behold, however, Data.Graph already
exists!  Could someone enlighten me on the reason what is now Data.Graph
was chosen over FGL for inclusion into the base library?

Also, given that Data.Graph already exists, what would be a good place for
FGL?  Data.Graph.FGL seems iffy for two reasons - it implies that it's a
subset of Data.Graph, and it still uses an acronym instead of a
descriptive name.

Thanks much!

Abe