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>