On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 12:24:44PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Jan 05, 2002 at 01:56:34PM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote: <> > > The module that coders need to check out to work inside should be light, > > contain only the internal source coded needed to build, and be adapted > > to maximum convenience toward hacking the code inside. The structure > > which you have passed down by royal decree is zero for three. > > Royal decree? Bullshit. I announced it to the list and the only person > who complained about it was you, yet you offered no reasonable > alternative that I could see (unless you consider changing every Java > developer in the world's mind about how to lay out their code is an > alternative). <>
This is my alternative: Leave the code in the current module. As I said, changing the java package name would be nice, but it is far from worth the effort of moving all the code. The beautification that needs to be made is the removal of all non-java and non-fred stuff from that module. This also means we won't destroy the often very useful version history of the files. If you want to do have a module be the preperation area for the distributions, then have that module contain the scripts and readmes and whatnot - it is completely possible with CVS to check out one module into a subdirectory of another, so you could easly have a src/ subdirectory of that module and checkout the Freenet module int it (thus having your directory structure look just the way you want it). I think that the only decent thing to do is have the binary distributions move the Freenet package into a system specific java tree - but since I am not planning to make the distributions, I will have accept that others choose the route of folly. Just leave the code alone. <> -- Oskar Sandberg oskar at freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
