src/ directory (was: Re: Showstoppers: Alpha 9)

[Greg Stein <gs...@lyra.org>]

On Tue, Dec 12, 2000 at 05:25:49PM -0800, fielding@ebuilt.com wrote:
> > > I would like to see more opinions on the src/ thing than myself, OtherBill,
> > > and Ryan. We should not proceed on *any* course of action without that. I
> > > suspect we will not have it resolved by tomorrow. I'm going to work on a
> > > bunch of the items for the release, but we should do something to get a
> > > write-up of the src-vs-not alternatives and get some more input.
> 
> I think it is goofy to place a src directory in a source tree -- everything
> in the distribution is source.  If there are too many subdirectories, then
> either abstract them into relevant categories or split them into different
> library modules.

It isn't "a source tree". There is a lot more in the CVS repository than
just source. There are build mechanisms, documentation, test programs and
framework, public include areas, etc.

Categorization is quite difficult: consider APR's 15 source subdirs. How
could those possibly be grouped?

We've already split the conceptual "portability code" and "portable code"
into APR and APRUTIL respectively. But there are still a bunch of
sub-categories that defy further grouping.

The grouping that we *have* done (in APRUTIL, at least) is: build support,
public headers, documentation, testing code, and source code. I believe a
similar grouping makes sense within APR, too.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/

Re: src/ directory (was: Re: Showstoppers: Alpha 9)

[rb...@covalent.net]

> > I think it is goofy to place a src directory in a source tree -- everything
> > in the distribution is source.  If there are too many subdirectories, then
> > either abstract them into relevant categories or split them into different
> > library modules.
> 
> It isn't "a source tree". There is a lot more in the CVS repository than
> just source. There are build mechanisms, documentation, test programs and
> framework, public include areas, etc.
> 
> Categorization is quite difficult: consider APR's 15 source subdirs. How
> could those possibly be grouped?

It is very easy to group parts of APR.  This is just off the top of my
head, and without looking at all the dirs,

IO/
	file_io
	network_io
mem/
	shm
	pools (currently called lib)

I'm sure that looking closer will provide many more examples.

Ryan
_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------