Sigh. So it's inconsistent all over. Hadn't looked deep enough. Maybe it's still too early to worry about that kind of detail.
On April 6, 2017 7:43:42 PM MDT, Soemin Tjong <stjong at exchange.microsoft.com> wrote: >Yup, thanks for the info. I must have picked up nonstandard examples >(connectivity\inc, connectivity\common\inc, connectivity\util\inc, >security\provisioning\samples, resource-directory\samples, >stack\samples). > >Though, it's good that at the end public facing files are copied to a >single directory in out (like >iotivity\out\windows\amd64\debug\include\resource). > >-----Original Message----- >From: Mats Wichmann [mailto:mats at wichmann.us] >Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2017 6:11 PM >To: Soemin Tjong <stjong at exchange.microsoft.com>; Dave Thaler ><dthaler at microsoft.com>; Gregg Reynolds <dev at mobileink.com>; Daniel >Mihai <Daniel.Mihai at microsoft.com> >Cc: iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org >Subject: Re: [dev] Public and Experimental Public C APIs > >On 04/06/2017 06:21 PM, Soemin Tjong wrote: >>> except the new IPCA tree has decided to use different names for a >>> couple of those, hint hint... do we actually want a consistent tree >>> structure? or is that just being too pedantic?) >> >> Hi Mats, saw the hints on IPCA directory. That might be the case >when it moved from Service to Resource. Which directory names were >you referring to? > >it wasn't a big deal, just not consistent with other projects: it uses >"inc" instead of "include" and "samples" instead of "examples". -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20170406/42eee49e/attachment.html>
