Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 17:24:58 +0100 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, tuexen@FreeBSD.org, jhb@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: moving sctp to a separate directory ? Message-ID: <20100109162458.GA8270@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> In-Reply-To: <20100108.175640.1104512900458971844.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20100107203536.GB8230@rincewind.paeps.cx> <20100107214334.GA35184@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <201001080812.21124.jhb@freebsd.org> <20100108.175640.1104512900458971844.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 08, 2010 at 05:56:40PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <201001080812.21124.jhb@freebsd.org> > John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> writes: > : On Thursday 07 January 2010 4:43:34 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote: > : > > What do you do with udp, for instance? Compared to tcp and sctp, it's > : > > trivial in terms of code, but it's an upper layer protocol from the > : > > perspective of netinet/netinet6 - do we put it in its own directory too? > : > > Also note that this won't only cause churn for people who have patches against > : > > or (out-of-tree) branches from netinet/, but also in other kernel subsystems > : > > which rely on tcp -- nfs, for instance. > : > > : > + i find the concern about churn in external patchsets a bit weak, first of > : > all because this is bound to happen unless we stop all development, > : > and secondly because this kind of file moving or splitting happens > : > once every 10-15 years which is well beyond the lifetime of a patchset. > : > : Having the files rename is entirely different from merging changes. At least > : for svn and p4 I believe that merging a rename into a branch is not smart > : enough to merge your local changes into the new files. Instead it involves a > : big manual fixup. > : > : Also, the 10-15 years thing is completely non-relevant. What is relevant is > : if you are working on a project in a branch and someone renames files before > : you have finished your branch and merged it up to HEAD. For example, assume > : that someone else renamed the ipfw files in HEAD next week. That would > : create an utter mess for you to resolve in your current ipfw3 branch. Moving > : TCP would create similar a headache, except much more widespread since TCP is > : one of the most widely worked-on subsystems. > : > : FWIW, I do think it would be cleaner to have netinet more split up perhaps, > : but I do not think it is worth the pain that would be involved. > > It is painful enough moving drivers around. I think that while well > intentioned, it will cause us nothing but grief. given the overwhelming response, i give up :) > Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100109162458.GA8270>