Hi @josevalin - I’m not sure about this convention. Breaking the convention will confuse people.
Suppose you have a single module defining say JoesApp.lib.misc and put it in a file called crypto/utilities/rsa.ex this will confuse everybody and is a violation of the principle of least astonishment. If you have hundreds of thousands of modules then you’ll have to build an index to find a particular module.
I would have liked a stronger convention - something like if there is no good counter-reason the file and module names should be identical. And if they are different the reason should be documented.
(actually I’d really like no readable file names at all - all file names should be SHA’s of the content and in a global content addressable store - but we’re not there yet 
A counter case would be when the file names is (say) the SHA1 of the content or a UUID (I have used both conventions) - here it would be obvious that the file name and module name differ.
Failing a stronger convention, a warning “Gratuitous module/file name used ..” might warn the user that whatever convention they were using might confuse people later.
