On Fri, 8 Jan 2010, John Baldwin wrote:
Also, the 10-15 years thing is completely non-relevant. What is relevant is
if you are working on a project in a branch and someone renames files before
you have finished your branch and merged it up to HEAD. For example, assume
that someone else
On Thursday 07 January 2010 4:43:34 pm Luigi Rizzo wrote:
What do you do with udp, for instance? Compared to tcp and sctp, it's
trivial in terms of code, but it's an upper layer protocol from the
perspective of netinet/netinet6 - do we put it in its own directory too?
Also note that this
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
taking a random commit to this tree -- would you guys consider moving the
sctp sources to its own directory, e.g. netinet/sctp/ or something that
suits better ?
It would help to browse through the directory:
NAMEFILES
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
I also think that the name of the new directory or the exact percentage of
ipv4-ness or netinet-ness of the sctp* and tcp* and multicast* stuff is
irrelevant. Moving directories with svn is so easy that we should not worry
even if we need a couple of
On 2010-01-04 23:23:23 (+0100), Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote:
This was the reason why I moved ipfw-related stuff out of the way
and plan to do the same with tcp unless someone precedes me.
Please discuss this on -net or so first. I have worked in an environment
where tcp was moved out
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 09:35:36PM +0100, Philip Paeps wrote:
On 2010-01-04 23:23:23 (+0100), Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote:
This was the reason why I moved ipfw-related stuff out of the way
and plan to do the same with tcp unless someone precedes me.
Please discuss this on -net or
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
I also think that the name of the new directory or the exact percentage of
ipv4-ness or netinet-ness of the sctp* and tcp* and multicast* stuff
is irrelevant. Moving directories with svn is so easy that we should not
worry even if we need a couple of
On 04/01/2010 22:23, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
I also think that the name of the new directory or the exact percentage of
ipv4-ness or netinet-ness of the sctp* and tcp* and multicast* stuff
is irrelevant. Moving directories with svn is so easy that we should not
worry even if we need a couple of
taking a random commit to this tree -- would you guys consider moving
the sctp sources to its own directory, e.g. netinet/sctp/ or something
that suits better ?
It would help to browse through the directory:
NAMEFILES LINES
netinet/156
Luigi Rizzo wrote:
taking a random commit to this tree -- would you guys consider moving
the sctp sources to its own directory, e.g. netinet/sctp/ or something
that suits better ?
It would help to browse through the directory:
NAMEFILES LINES
netinet/
On Mon, 4 Jan 2010, Julian Elischer wrote:
Luigi Rizzo wrote:
taking a random commit to this tree -- would you guys consider moving
the sctp sources to its own directory, e.g. netinet/sctp/ or something
that suits better ?
It would help to browse through the directory:
NAME
On Jan 4, 2010, at 8:00 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
taking a random commit to this tree -- would you guys consider moving
the sctp sources to its own directory, e.g. netinet/sctp/ or something
that suits better ?
Why do you think that a place different from netinet/ does suit
better for the
12 matches
Mail list logo
