On Wed, 20 Jan 1999, Mike Smith wrote: > > I was just pointing out that having things in subdirectories > > is better than having a zillion files piled into a single directory. > > I'm torn between agreeing that it's tidier and disagreeing on the > grounds that it's much more of a pain to administer. "Where is that > damnned module?" "Why am I loading a stale version of saver_foo?", etc.
Putting the source code in different directories is not equivilent to putting the modules in different directories, needless to say. :-) As such, I think having a structured source tree is really nice, but the simplicity of modules in a single directory in the style of MacOS extensions as you discuss has appeal (and means that users don't have to try and reproduce a directory hierarchy for binary-only modules they get somewhere). On the other hand, this still requires moderation in namespace use for modules. Robert N Watson rob...@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ PGP key fingerprint: 03 01 DD 8E 15 67 48 73 25 6D 10 FC EC 68 C1 1C Carnegie Mellon University http://www.cmu.edu/ TIS Labs at Network Associates, Inc. http://www.tis.com/ SafePort Network Services http://www.safeport.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majord...@freebsd.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
