Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:16:47 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> Cc: usb@FreeBSD.org, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@FreeBSD.org>, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP new usb code coming in. Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.1.10.0808192215440.62454@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <48AB3408.4030703@FreeBSD.org> References: <20080819194413.GB16977@elvis.mu.org> <48AB32D4.5040904@FreeBSD.org> <48AB3408.4030703@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Maxim Sobolev wrote: >> Alfred Perlstein wrote: >>> Q. Can we change the name from "usb2_" to my favorite name? A. No. This >>> is for a short period, stop being so annoying. >> >> Why not just "usb_"? You can then leave it as is then avoiding violating >> POLA second time. Otherwise people would confuse it with USB 2.0. > > P.S. I am talking about entries for kernel config here, not about names of > directories and source files. With the move to Subversion, there's a significantly lower technical barrier to renaming files in the tree, especially if they exist only in HEAD. Let's assume that, when the time comes to remove the old USB implementation, we will do whatever renaming of directories, files, and symbols that may make sense. That is to say, let's leave the names as-is and focus on the semantics. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.1.10.0808192215440.62454>