From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C97F1B67E for ; Tue, 3 Apr 2018 12:58:00 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Apr 2018 03:57:58 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.48,400,1517904000"; d="scan'208";a="44498001" Received: from bricha3-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.237.221.51]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 03 Apr 2018 03:57:56 -0700 Received: by (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 03 Apr 2018 11:57:55 +0100 Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:57:55 +0100 From: Bruce Richardson To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: Ferruh Yigit , John McNamara , Marko Kovacevic , dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20180403105755.GB3544@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20180403092859.71589-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <8464158.iTavIsMWKz@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8464158.iTavIsMWKz@xps> Organization: Intel Research and Development Ireland Ltd. User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: rename folder to library name X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 10:58:00 -0000 On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 12:24:15PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 03/04/2018 11:28, Ferruh Yigit: > > Library folder name and output library name are same except a few flaws > > including librte_ether. > > > > This library is network device abstraction layer, the name "ethdev" fits > > better than "ether", and library & header files already named as ethdev. > > > > Also there is a rte_ether.h in the net library which can cause confusion. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit > > --- > > Not sure if the we are ready for this change J > > > > This is one the issues that the hassle of the change doesn't worth the > > benefit and you may prefer to live with the flaw. > > > > Also a concern is this breaks the git history. > > Yes it breaks the git history. > I am a big user of gitk. Do you know how to follow the history after rename > with gitk? > > I think it is a good change but I would like to be sure it will not > bother us every day. > For those of use with even slight OCD, having it the way it is bothers us every day! :-) I view this as something that we really should do some day - it's just broken the way the way it is right now - and so the sooner we take the hit and fix it, the better. If you do need to find the history of the file, would git blame work well enough for you? /Bruce