apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@apache.org>
Subject Re: arch specific include files, the naming thereof
Date Mon, 06 Jan 2003 14:32:55 GMT
At 05:45 AM 1/6/2003, Thom May wrote:
>* Greg Stein (gstein@lyra.org) wrote :
>> On Sun, Jan 05, 2003 at 11:59:50PM -0500, Cliff Woolley wrote:
>> >...
>> > My argument against using "apr_*.h" would be twofold.
>> Fair enough... both points make sense.
>Ok, so this looks like a rough consensus on apr_private_*.h, right?

I would personally prefer we stick with apr_arch_*.h ... that's a nifty idea
and not to far from Greg's preference for apr_priv_*.h to keep it short
and sweet.  Either is my preference, apr_private_*.h seems too wordy
when you end up with names like apr_private_thread_mutex.h

>What's the best way to rename the files? cvs rm and add them again with new
>names, or move the RCS files directly (something i've never tried and have
>no great desire to do on a live server without someone going "yeah, that
>works" ;-) )?

If we want to keep the history, you can cp the ,v files with some caviats;

1) Start with cp apr_foo.h apr_arch_foo.h
2) cvs rm apr_foo.h
3) cvs tag -d tag apr_arch_foo.h

There is one problem, apr_arch_foo.h files will be checked out along with
apr_foo.h if you go by old checkouts by date.  That isn't a huge problem
when you consider that they are just unreferenced files (the #includes for
that date tag will be looking for apr_foo.h.)  Also consider that they reside
in their arch/ tree and aren't installed when one builds apr.

I'd say that problem is minimal, and preserving the history in an easy
to follow manner is far more important.


View raw message