Re: [RFC+PATCH 1/1] Move SCM interoperability tools into scm/
- From
Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jul 9, 2006, 21:26 UTC
- Message-ID
- <46a038f90607091426u5a6ea328h2090a876e51725ce@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <11524258261798-git-send-email-ryan@michonline.com>
On 7/9/06, Ryan Anderson <ryan@michonline.com> wrote:
> This is the first in a series to categorize the source tree a little bit more > than it is currently.
Given that you title it RFC, I guess it hasn't been discussed before. I personally don't see much benefit from the move/rename. The tree is not so large, the SCM import/export utilities are a single file each and their names are quite clear. Having /contrib is more an issue of marking utilities there as 'new, experimental, unsupported', and the assumption is that when something matures it moves out of /contrib.
So I have to ask... what are the expected benefits of the move?
In any case, use /interop instead. /scm in the tree of an SCM could be anything ;-)
martin