Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:39:15 -0500 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: mohamed aslan <maslanbsd@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: organization Message-ID: <p06210206be6f3143edec@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <319cceca05032907411014a218@mail.gmail.com> References: <319cceca0503281001792baf39@mail.gmail.com> <42485A54.9000101@freebsdbrasil.com.br> <319cceca05032811484cb1a95b@mail.gmail.com> <42487982.30909@freebsdbrasil.com.br> <319cceca05032907411014a218@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 7:41 AM -0800 3/29/05, mohamed aslan wrote: >guys this is not a flame war >but the linux way in arranging the source file is really better >than freebsd way, it's a fact. > >however it's easy to rearrange it in 1 min as someone said before. >but i mean this step should be done from the core team. >for example all fs has to go in a subdir called fs >arch specific file should go in subdir called arch/(arch name) >and so on . One thing to watch out for is the mess this would cause in the CVS repository. CVS does not track "file moves", so if we move a lot of things around then we just end up with them in *both* the old and the new locations. I certainly believe the tree could be organized better than it is, but the benefits from reorganizing are just not worth the time and effort it would take (*), and the mess it would make out of the CVS repository. (* - 99% of the time and effort would be in getting everyone to *agree* on the best layout...) -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p06210206be6f3143edec>