From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4753 invoked by alias); 15 Oct 2013 17:52:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 4649 invoked by uid 89); 15 Oct 2013 17:52:36 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net Received: from elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net (HELO elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net) (209.86.89.61) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:52:35 +0000 Received: from [68.96.200.16] (helo=macbook2.local) by elasmtp-galgo.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1VW8nJ-0000XS-En for gdb@sourceware.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:52:33 -0400 Message-ID: <525D80DC.4030207@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:52:00 -0000 From: Stan Shebs User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130801 Thunderbird/17.0.8 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: git conversion status References: <871u3n3hxc.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <87wqlf21bt.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87wqlf21bt.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ELNK-Trace: ae6f8838ff913eba0cc1426638a40ef67e972de0d01da9403e76781b2384fb40074018731c2d0b50350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00065.txt.bz2 On 10/14/13 10:45 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: > Fred> 'git clone URL' will produce a directory called "src" which > Fred> is utterly meaningless on any developer's machine. > > I chose it because the existing repository is named "src". > > I don't particularly care what the repository is named. > If folks want to debate it, I will rename it to the winner. > Time is running out for that though. Then I better put in my vote for "src". :-) My reasoning is that "src" has meant "binutils & GDB etc" for over 20 years now, and there is no other use of "src" in the GNU universe that has designated or will designate a project or repo. So in a sense it's justifiable to "reserve" the term in this particular case. Stan stan@codesourcery.com