Seems good to me, too. :wink:
About OSX, with the actual structure of framework we must have a SFML.framework (not SFML2.framework) to have access to the header easily. Thus, keeping this same naming convention, we would have the same name as with SFML 1.
Although we won't be able to have SFML 1.x and 2.x installed simultaneously (like with 1.a and 1.b) (lambda user and developers concerned). Is that a concern ? If so, we can use the same system as Windows but for developers (not lambda user as the «header-only» framework is not required after compilation), SFML.framework is an issue as one would have to change manually this file to use 1.x or 2.x.
Or maybe something with Framework versioning (but I don't know how it works at all) and maybe there won't be such issue for developers.
