Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 07:29:54PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > >> > Yes, we do suck at rename following. The problem is that it is partially >> [...] >> This is no excuse not to do proper source tree reorganization. > > I think this is the crux of our disagreement. I don't agree that your > proposal is any way more "proper" than what is there now. Leaving the > rename issue aside (i.e., if we were starting a new project), I would > still be slightly against a src/ directory. I find them annoying. > > But I don't care _that_ much, and I would rather not waste either of our > time debating it more. I would much rather you spend your time on > pack v4. :) I am with you, both counts on this topic. I don't necessarily agree that having sources at the top-level is bad, I don't want to see Nico wasting his time arguing, and I do see some value in the proposal that gives us an opportunity for dogfooding (but we already have done so with builtin/ and it was not all that annoying---I think the timing was rather good and the tree was semi-quiescent). Ehh, that makes it not "both" but "two and half" counts ;-). As long as the new directories are named sanely (one of the things I detest is abbreviated uppercase silliness like "Src", "Lib"), I am fine with the proposal. Also I have a mild preference to keep build-products next to the source (i.e. no separate "obj" directory). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html