[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Scheme-reports] John Cowan's rationales for 4th ballot votes

(Replying on the scheme-reports list as I am not a working group member.)

Am 23.08.2011 02:15, schrieb John Cowan:
> #237 Change "scheme" in module names to "rsn" or "rs11" or something else
> "Scheme2011" is a bit long, but very clear.

I think that voting on a concrete name for the module namespace now is 
questionable, as (a.) it very much depends on the name that WG1 Scheme 
and the corresponding report will have, and (b.) whether WG2 will have 
module versioning (which would make a name with an embedded version - 
such as "scheme2011" - wouldn't be a particularly good choice). I think 
at least (a.) should be sorted out before this can be sensibly voted on.

If I could vote, my preferences would be "rsn", then "rs11". (As future 
versions of the report hopefully won't have to bring such a large number 
of incompatibilities to its predecessor again, I don't think that 
putting the version in the name is all that important, or even desirable.)


Scheme-reports mailing list