Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Pranit Bauva
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Stefan Beller writes: > >> For now I would just go with 3 directories: >> >> non-git/ (or util, helpers, or anything that could be ripped out and be >> useful >> e.g. strbufs, argv-array run-command, lockfile >> git/ (maybe called lib

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Stefan Beller
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 4:11 AM, Duy Nguyen wrote: > Good? Bad? Ugly? For now I would just go with 3 directories: non-git/ (or util, helpers, or anything that could be ripped out and be useful e.g. strbufs, argv-array run-command, lockfile git/ (maybe called lib? All stuff that is pure Git a

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Junio C Hamano
Stefan Beller writes: > For now I would just go with 3 directories: > > non-git/ (or util, helpers, or anything that could be ripped out and be useful > e.g. strbufs, argv-array run-command, lockfile > git/ (maybe called lib? All stuff that is pure Git and is used for libgit > > builtin/ (as

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Jeff King
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 06:11:36PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > Git's top directory is crowded and I think it's agreed that moving > test-* to t/helper is a good move. I just wanted to check if we could > take this opportunity (after v2.8.0) to move some other files too. I > propose the following ne

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi Duy, On Thu, 17 Mar 2016, Duy Nguyen wrote: > Git's top directory is crowded and I think it's agreed that moving > test-* to t/helper is a good move. I just wanted to check if we could > take this opportunity (after v2.8.0) to move some other files too. I > propose the following new subdirs >

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 06:11:36PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > >> Git's top directory is crowded and I think it's agreed that moving >> test-* to t/helper is a good move. I just wanted to check if we could >> take this opportunity (after v2.8.0)

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Junio C Hamano
John Keeping writes: > The organisation of the git code shouldn't make a difference since CGit > just links with libgit.a, even if it does CGit pulls in git.git as a > submodule so it can just fix any problems in the same commit that > updates the submodule reference. I was mostly worried about

[RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Duy Nguyen
Git's top directory is crowded and I think it's agreed that moving test-* to t/helper is a good move. I just wanted to check if we could take this opportunity (after v2.8.0) to move some other files too. I propose the following new subdirs lib --- This contains files that are about data structures

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> Good? Bad? Ugly? > > Disruptive. Probably a change for 3.0? We tested it with the builtin rename a long time ago, so it's probably not bad. By the principle of "dogfooding", we should try it soon and make sure it's not disruptive, or

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread John Keeping
On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:10:44PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Stefan Beller writes: > > > For now I would just go with 3 directories: > > > > non-git/ (or util, helpers, or anything that could be ripped out and be > > useful > > e.g. strbufs, argv-array run-command, lockfile > > git/ (ma

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Junio C Hamano
Duy Nguyen writes: > Good? Bad? Ugly? Too fine-grained to induce confusion for things that have to work as a bridge between two categories (e.g. odb & index). In short, bad and ugly. I am OK with a looser classification e.g. (1) things that can be used without Git at all like strbuf, string-li

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-19 Thread Thomas Adam
On 17 March 2016 at 11:11, Duy Nguyen wrote: > Git's top directory is crowded and I think it's agreed that moving > test-* to t/helper is a good move. I just wanted to check if we could > take this opportunity (after v2.8.0) to move some other files too. I > propose the following new subdirs I wo

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-18 Thread Junio C Hamano
Thomas Adam writes: > On 17 March 2016 at 11:11, Duy Nguyen wrote: >> Git's top directory is crowded and I think it's agreed that moving >> test-* to t/helper is a good move. I just wanted to check if we could >> take this opportunity (after v2.8.0) to move some other files too. I >> propose the

Re: [RFC] Code reorgnization

2016-03-18 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 4:49 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > John Keeping writes: > >> The organisation of the git code shouldn't make a difference since CGit >> just links with libgit.a, even if it does CGit pulls in git.git as a >> submodule so it can just fix any problems in the same commit that >