From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [1.8.0] reorganize the mess that the source tree has become Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 13:53:48 -0800 Message-ID: <7v1v3rzaj7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vzkqh8vqw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vwrll57ha.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20110131210045.GB14419@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20110131231210.GD14419@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20110201014807.GA2722@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Nicolas Pitre , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 01 22:54:07 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PkOAp-0002ka-7o for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 22:54:07 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752851Ab1BAVyB (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:54:01 -0500 Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:46905 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752798Ab1BAVyA (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:54:00 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 506E74910; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:54:50 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=1XozSSUbmgWx0qG8vu7GrZQNM74=; b=d4EtP9 ++XsdfyeabHqtJKQOZrphyHRdeRBHdfPotkJS5FBcnXI1FUd6YWmoS/VPicDl42w UAZnK7Gd1uJH32t8HpnXxc4EiZVFOYsNULKMcPbU6GUkdU8a5l2g8WdnQt1HgU02 3arxvxO+kYdYQpq/ORkIOLuJnBxbPgp6x6s6U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=to:cc:subject :references:from:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=iUTtyfsACjAiqzHKQfXEgE4X55g6quvI aDIAiuXLZle5Uv03HUZuye/wsLgzutl2aVLFz+pMQLC5SQ9LydmxHkX+w6O7dgtI TxegL5GpaOKS38GZ78hcKe44Se715NDTR5/vTiN8DK7rI+C00biJO0KaJVfaXfPI izaKZYLFWGk= Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1BF9490F; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:54:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2366490B; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:54:42 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20110201014807.GA2722@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon\, 31 Jan 2011 20\:48\:07 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E28ED20E-2E4D-11E0-BC2F-F13235C70CBC-77302942!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 07:29:54PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > >> > Yes, we do suck at rename following. The problem is that it is partially >> [...] >> This is no excuse not to do proper source tree reorganization. > > I think this is the crux of our disagreement. I don't agree that your > proposal is any way more "proper" than what is there now. Leaving the > rename issue aside (i.e., if we were starting a new project), I would > still be slightly against a src/ directory. I find them annoying. > > But I don't care _that_ much, and I would rather not waste either of our > time debating it more. I would much rather you spend your time on > pack v4. :) I am with you, both counts on this topic. I don't necessarily agree that having sources at the top-level is bad, I don't want to see Nico wasting his time arguing, and I do see some value in the proposal that gives us an opportunity for dogfooding (but we already have done so with builtin/ and it was not all that annoying---I think the timing was rather good and the tree was semi-quiescent). Ehh, that makes it not "both" but "two and half" counts ;-). As long as the new directories are named sanely (one of the things I detest is abbreviated uppercase silliness like "Src", "Lib"), I am fine with the proposal. Also I have a mild preference to keep build-products next to the source (i.e. no separate "obj" directory).