Re: [RFC] Move tools sources to the tools directory (was Re: [PATCH v2] MAINTAINERS: Fix the location of tools manuals)

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 04/02/21 18:42, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 2/4/21 3:40 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 04/02/21 15:22, Wainer dos Santos Moschetta wrote:
>>>>> -F: docs/interop/virtfs-proxy-helper.rst
>>>>> +F: docs/tools/virtfs-proxy-helper.rst
>>>>
>>>> Unrelated, but Paolo once said helpers are not tools.
>>
>> I think helpers is not a good word.  However, if an executable:
>>
>> - can be started directly by QEMU, or is not useful without an emulator
>>
>> - is usually too complex for a user to run manually
>>
>> then it should be documented in docs/interop (not docs/tools).  Their
>> sources however can be in tools/, that's not a problem at all.
> 
> I understand tools can be built/used standalone (no dependence),
> while helpers are companion of another binary, thus dependent on it:
> 
> - we can build tools without emulator
> - it is probably pointless to build an helper without its helpee
> - some binaries can't be use without helpers
> 
> Maybe "companion" is a better candidate to describe?

I don't think we use the word helper anymore in the build system, so 
really the only thing left is whether the documentation goes in tools/ 
or interop/.

The sources can be in tools/ unconditionally if people decide that's 
desirable, either with or without subdirectories.  I didn't propose that 
because the Meson change was big enough and it can be the decision of 
individual maintainers.

Moving the individual tools is easy enough, since most of them are just 
one source file, however moving the executables would require changes in 
the tests and son on.

Paolo