Hi Al. On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 02:00:52PM -0400, al davis wrote: > On Thursday 25 April 2013, Felix Salfelder wrote: > > would you mind renaming lib to src? that would make porting > > much easier, as the history (well half of it) wont be hosed. > > some fixes we have talked about here are already commited to > > gnucap-uf and could be simply cherry-picked. > > what do others think?
i cant find much about directory structure conventions but [1]: """ The sources and headers for the project's main application will be stored in yet another subdirectory, traditionally named `src'. There are other conventional directories your developers might expect too: A `doc' directory for project documentation; and a `test' directory for the project self test suite. """ > calling it "lib" is consistent with other programs. depends on whether you consider libgnucap to be part of the 'main application'. i think i do. > half? more like a quarter, but even so, the real history is in > RCS, which doesn't carry over anyway. It has gotten quite messy > over the years. Those are all factors in my thought of wait for > the split, then start clean. well yes, it would make more sense to move lib, include and main back to src (as part of the main program). but i know, theres no point in asking for that :/ it's all about rebasing the history of gnucap-uf which i need to do somehow. that would be much easier without the directory breakage. > Having it NOT called src was an important part of my migration > procedure ... for a while keeping new and old in parallel. i see. > I do think the "apps" part is up for discussion. As it stands, > "apps" is all of the plugins that are loaded by default. > Should it be split, perhaps "devices" "commands" etc.?? Should > they be compiled one by one and a config file lists which to > add? unfortunately "apps" leaves a bad taste nowadays, which probably was not intended. so i'd vote for renaming (while we're at it). "lib" is a possible name for the loadable modules directory (the terminology used in DLOPEN(3) is "dlopen() loads the dynamic library [...]"). also "plugins", or "modules" is fine but has more characters. i think theres no gain in multiple plugin directories. seperating devices from commands just complicates compiling all in one library. splitting up source to different libraries (optionally?) wont require seperate directories. my 2cts felix [1] http://www.sourceware.org/autobook/autobook/autobook_46.html _______________________________________________ Gnucap-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucap-devel
