> hmm.. > what you had suggested sounds like a schema but i guess to have everybody > notice that glob2a is not used anymore we would need something different. > glob2a_old > glob2b_old > glob2c_old > glob2d > ?
Yes, that is nice. Should we go for this naming? Do you agree for me to renamed the current glob2-new into glob2b, and the current glob2-old into glob2a-old? Have a nice day, Steph -- http://stephane.magnenat.net _______________________________________________ glob2-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/glob2-devel
