On 18/02/2012 6:27 PM, Manolo Gouy wrote: >> On 17/02/2012 8:42 PM, fltk-dev@ wrote: >> >> Dont you think that using the label "fltk3" might create problem in >> future upgrades?. Something like "Fltk" might be a better choice. >> >> Mike. >> > > I fully agree that the name fltk3 would be awkward if FLTK 4.x > ever exists. The difficulty is that fltk is used by FLTK 2.0 > with which FLTK 3.0 aims to be compatible. > Do you suggest Fltk as opposed to fltk ? That would be error-prone. > What about fl or FL ?
I think fl will be fine. Let the others tune in also. Thank you. Mike. _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list fltk-dev@easysw.com http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
