From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Woodhouse Subject: Re: [PATCH] btrfs-progs: autotoolized and splitup into {libbtrfs,tools,tests} Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:38:30 +0100 Message-ID: <1223620710.28324.95.camel@macbook.infradead.org> References: <200810090420.49767.trapni@gentoo.org> <1223589129.7861.61.camel@telesto> <1223590043.28324.83.camel@macbook.infradead.org> <200810100301.52995.trapni@gentoo.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Eric Anopolsky , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Parpart Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200810100301.52995.trapni@gentoo.org> List-ID: On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 03:01 +0200, Christian Parpart wrote: > whether btrfs to be using autotools or not, the other kind this patch > addressed seems to be more important to me: project modularization. That makes a certain amount of sense, but should definitely be submitted as a separate patch. And it would probably be best to generate it with 'git-diff -M' so that renamed files are shown as such. rather than deletion and addition. That'll make your patch far more reviewable. I'm still not convinced that third party code should be linking against a libbtrfs just yet, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be set up to allow that to happen in future. -- David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre David.Woodhouse@intel.com Intel Corporation