Re: core subdirectories

How else are you thinking about refactoring the tree structure?  

-bill


On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 03:33:48PM -0600, Huston wrote:
> Sorry I'm late chiming in on this topic. I think that renaming the directory
> is probably the right thing to do. Using the name 'core' has caused problems
> with other tools (e.g. cvs).
> 
> I think the first step is to come up with a new name for the directory that
> is acceptable. I don't have any good name suggestions at the moment.
> 
> Second is to choose a method for doing the rename. I don't like the idea of
> moving the files on the file system because that code isn't all that old,
> besides the guys at sf have to move it for us since we don't have access to
> the file system. Instead I would prefer one of two approaches.
> 
> 1. cvs add the files from core into the new directory name in the existing
> tree and then cvs remove the old files.
> 
> or
> 
> 2. reimporting all of the code in a new top level directory with the
> directory name changes. If we do this I would like to move around some of
> the other files into better locations at the same time.
> 
> There are advantages and disadvantages to both. I think we could start with
> 1. and then move to 2. unless someone wants to take on 2 right now.
> 
> --Huston
> 


-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board
for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today!
http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31