On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 12:13:26AM +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > Dear diary, on Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 11:26:59PM CEST, I got a letter > where Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> said that... > > So I have to ask... what are the expected benefits of the move? > > I've been meaning to do something like this for some time already; my > itch have been the builtins. The tree size _is_ getting out of hand and > a little more categorization of the sources would certainly help. That's what I was thinking, as well, basically. I started with the "scm interop" tools because they should be the least controversial to move around. > Although I'd take a different approach: > > libgit/ > builtin/ > standalone/ > scripts/ > > > In any case, use /interop instead. /scm in the tree of an SCM could be > > anything ;-) > > I agree on this point. Very good point. So these seem obvious to me: libgit/ (maybe just lib/?) builtin/ interop/ I'm less sure of the rest, but I'll poke at doing the above for the moment, and worry about the rest later. Comments on a way to make the Makefile less repetitive would be appreciated, though. -- Ryan Anderson sometimes Pug Majere - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Mon Jul 10 08:24:50 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-07-10 08:28:47 EST