I think the yearly naming convention has a rustic charm about it, kind
of like french wines. We can all sit down one day and have a big
discussion which year was the best vintage. Reminisce about the more
intense full-bodied flavour of the second batch of 2009, which is lovely
in small sips, but can go a bit awry when large gulps are involved... or
the effect on the palate of annually increasing Scala overtones; it
shall be grand!
On a more serious note, +1 for calling it Isabelle 2011.
Rafal Kolanski.
On 07/01/11 20:00, Michael Norrish wrote:
On 7/01/11 7:53 PM, Tobias Nipkow wrote:
I don't see any good reason for the skewed naming scheme of 2009-x in
2010 or 2011. We should use the year that the release was made in,
period. That avoids unproductie arguments on how major or minor a
release is.
Or dispense with year numbers entirely.
Even Microsoft gave up on that idea for Windows.
Michael
_______________________________________________
isabelle-dev mailing list
isabelle-...@in.tum.de
https://mailmanbroy.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/mailman/listinfo/isabelle-dev
_______________________________________________
isabelle-dev mailing list
isabelle-...@in.tum.de
https://mailmanbroy.informatik.tu-muenchen.de/mailman/listinfo/isabelle-dev
