Re: Moving files from lisp/gnus/ to lisp/net/?

[Simon Josefsson]

Miles Bader <address@hidden> writes:

> Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden> writes:
>> Hm.  That would work.  But perhaps the best solution is to not move
>> any files after all.  :-)
>
> No, I think the files should be moved; the whole "but what about the
> history?" issue is IMHO, vastly overrated -- it's a minor bump in the
> road (if even that) that will make future operations smoother.
>
> Remember, the _info is still there_, just slightly more annoying to get
> at.  In my experience, looking at history is (1) not all that frequent
> an event, and (2) almost always involves the last few file revisions;
> point (2) is important because it means for commonly changed files, the
> bump caused by file moving will cease to be an issue after a short while
> (and for _un_-commonly changed files, well, they're not being changed
> very often, so aren't something to worry about very much).
>
> Moving the files will simplify coordination with Emacs, and not just
> with regard to the source-code "syncing" process: more importantly, it
> will clearly communicate to Gnus developers the status of a file they're
> working on, and make its relationship with Emacs obvious.
>
> Morever I think Gnus is large enough that some more directory structure
> is a good thing even without Emacs coordination to worry about.

One potential problem with a multi-directory structure is how to build
Gnus.  I'm not that familiar with the current code to build Gnus, but
it is not as simple as 'emacs -f byte-compile-file foo.el' on each
file.  Someone will have to experiment with getting a multi-directory
structure into a buildable state.

There is also the problem if getting users to modify their load-path's
to accommodate the new Gnus layout.

I wouldn't mind if the files stay as they are in Gnus CVS.  It seems
the gains of a directory split are somewhat vague, and it isn't clear
to me that a README.CVS wouldn't suffice.