From: Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 20:03:50 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/14] odb: gather the odb sources under odb/
Message-ID: <aoyjpmBXUhj_PPck@ugly.lan>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqjypfshnh.fsf@gitster.g>

On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 07:43:46AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> writes:
>> On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 10:18:51AM -0700, Michael Montalbo wrote:
>>>Move the 23 odb C sources and 26 headers into odb/ as renames.
>>>
>> i for one would go with lib/odb/.
>>
>I do not agree with lib/odb/ suggestion,
>
why not? it's hugely beneficial for the comprehensibility of the build 
system and discoverability when the physical project structure follows 
the logical one.

>>>+++ b/builtin/add.c
>>>-#include "object-file.h"
>>>-#include "odb.h"
>>>+#include "odb/object-file.h"
>>>+#include "odb/odb.h"
>>> 
>> that's the wrong include style here.
>> it was already wrong in a lot of places, but as you rewrite everything 
>> anyway, you could fix it just as well.
>
>Do you mean they should not be quoted in a pair of double quotes
>because the behaviour of such includes is implementation-defined
>(instead use "<>" as we use -I<path> on the command line)?
>
yes.
(actually, i don't mind relying on the popular interpretation that 
""-style means relative to the including file's containing directory.  
that mostly implies that "" is ok for in-module references when headers 
and sources live side by side.)

> Something else?
>
everything else i can think of would require more context, so it's a 
good first guess to assume that i didn't mean it.