We now use the `Maybe` prefix as also used for `Frame`: it indicates
whether progress has been made by stripping of a later or not.

For example, framing `P` in `(P ∨ Q) ∗ R` now succeeds and turns the goal into `R`.

This is to make sure that e.g. `//` in `iEval (rewrite .. // ..)` does
not immediately close the goal by reflexivity.

This is an old flag set by the ssr plugin, and recently unset in coq-stdpp,
see https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/robbertkrebbers/coq-stdpp/issues/5.

This reverts commit 913059d2.

This reverts commit 849abb8d, reversing changes
made to 8de0b894.  The merge was done
accidentally, before review happened.

I saw no need for `stuckness_flip`: strong atomicity always works,
while weak atomicity works only for expressions that are not stuck.
Since this seemed unclear, I split lemma `wp_atomic'` up into
`wp_strong_atomic` (parametric in the WP's `s`) and `wp_weak_atomic`
(not). The proof mode instance is stated in terms of the derived rule
`wp_atomic` (parametric in `s`).