These aren't my own words, but that of Dr. Thompson on the TAXACOM listserve. But, I do think the information is very interesting, something I didn't know of before and wanted to share. The original message is at the TAXACOM online archives.
"What is more important are the kinds of flies that Linnaeus knew. The most curious in respect to history, is Musca cellaris, described on page 597 [in the Systema Naturae]. Today this name is forgotten due to the fear of geneticists who don't want to recognize the fact that Linnaeus knew Drosophila melanogaster (Meigen 1830). Linneaus loved wine and beer, and described the little flies which are attracted to fermented fruits as Musca cellaris, the fly of the wine cellars. Later Kirby and Spence put this species in its own genus, Oinopota (from the Greek for wine drinker). So by the Official rules of Nomenclature (ICZN) Linnaeus never knew Drosophila nor the species was unknown to the authors of the first text in Entomology."
Curiosly, AnimalBase reports the name Musca cellaris as available. Meaning that it is what is referred to as a nomen dubium ("doubtful name") in taxonomy. Though Meigen described Drosophila melanogaster in 1830, in the 1881 the article How to make vinegar in The Household Cyclopedia of General Information referred to the vinegar fly as Musca cellaris. Did the author recognize Linnaeus' priority or was he or she working under the opinion that Drosophila melanogaster and Musca cellaris were separate taxa? Granted this was before the rise of genetics. It was the geneticists who supressed the more appropriate linnaean name in favor of Drosophila melangaster, whom they had grown to know and love. Drosophila means "lover of dew". I think I prefer a happy drunk fly instead.
*Update: Christopher Taylor has another perspective of fly name conundrums. RPM also weighs in.