From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39437) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bygx5-0001tw-OP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 11:14:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bygx2-00063j-Eg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 11:14:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:14:00 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf Message-ID: <20161024151400.GF4374@noname.redhat.com> References: <1476925867-24748-1-git-send-email-eblake@redhat.com> <20161024134750.GC4374@noname.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] less confusing block file names List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Eric Blake , berrange@redhat.com, qemu-block@nongnu.org, armbru@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, mreitz@redhat.com Am 24.10.2016 um 16:44 hat Paolo Bonzini geschrieben: > On 24/10/2016 15:47, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > One effect that makes me less than fully happy is that 'git log > > block/raw.c' without --follow mixes the history of the renamed driver > > with the history of the old, differently licensed one. On the other > > hand, the removal of the old driver happened three years ago, so it's > > probably unlikely that people confuse what belongs to which one and > > revive old code accidentally. > > Hmm, this makes it sensible to only apply patch 2, especially since Eric > has corteously split them. :) Maybe rename to something like raw-format.c instead then in patch 1? I must admit that it's reasonable enough to make the assumption that raw_bsd.c has something to do with a BSD-specific block driver. Kevin