On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 03:28:19PM -0800, jerry gay wrote:
> On 12/8/05, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Dec 8, 2005, at 18:54, jerry gay wrote:
> > > chip proposed changing the src/ dir to vm/. nobody complained,
> >
> > I have said several times that I don't see any reasons to r
On 12/8/05, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 8, 2005, at 18:54, jerry gay wrote:
> > chip proposed changing the src/ dir to vm/. nobody complained,
>
> I have said several times that I don't see any reasons to rename src.
>
okie-dokie, then. that's all the controversy i need for
On Dec 8, 2005, at 18:54, jerry gay wrote:
chip proposed changing the src/ dir to vm/. nobody complained,
I have said several times that I don't see any reasons to rename src.
There is no benefit at all. And src/ is quite common in distributions
for holding, well, the src.
leo
the first phase of the directory reorganization is complete. all
directory moves which do not involve the src/ directory are done. hope
this clears things up a bit. next, i'll be addressing src/ dirs. if
you'll recall from recent discussion...
On 11/29/05, jerry gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On
