In terms of the "priority" model I'd put "classes" above "misc" and below any functionally defined directories ... to my thought, it just recognizes that they're a slightly less random grouping, more significant than "misc" (because of USB-IF blessing) but where there also aren't enough product-level variances to need individual directories (like storage).
The bulk of the Linux source tree is functionally organized, not sorted by what some vendor group (USB-IF in this case) happened to deliver (or not). That'd change "net/cdc-ether.[hc]". Of course, if the rest of the Linux hierarchy were cleanly categorized, either "media" would be "video", or it'd include "sound" ... there are always glitches in naming schemes! :) > Can people take a look at: > bk://linuxusb.bkbits.net/dir_move-2.5/ > and see if you like what's there? Or if you don't run bitkeeper: http://linuxusb.bkbits.net:8080/dir_move-2.5/src/drivers/usb?nav=index.html|src/.|src/drivers > It's based off of Linus's tree, not the usb-2.5 tree, as it has to > eventually get pushed to him, and I didn't feel like doing this twice. > > I'll add a README tomorrow, it's late, and I've been spending too many > hours today hacking Makefiles :( Looks like, except for that README, it's what we discussed. I think this reorg will help make the 2.5+ USB scale a lot better, including addition of device side APIs. Thanks for the hours! - Dave _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
