On Monday, 3 December 2012 at 15:56:53 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Calling it std.xml2, std.xml3, etc is easy to understand and to find, it's short and future proof
Yes. And if we also do std.xml1 then going to 2 won't seem weird.We've had version discussions before, both here and on project downloads like that one DIP. The easiest solution for libraries, old projects, and end users is to just stick a number in the name.
Easy, obvious, functional.
