Suggested Xprint DDX reorg

[Felix Schulte]

On 1/9/06, Egbert Eich <eich at suse.de> wrote:
> Julien Lafon writes:
>  > On 1/5/06, Adam Jackson <ajax at nwnk.net> wrote:
>  > > We've got five DDXes that are complex enough to need or want auxiliary tools
>  > > or config bits.  Right now we have:
>  > >
>  > > xorg/Xprint
>  > > xorg/XpConfig
>  > > xorg/hw/xfree86
>  > > xorg/hw/xfree86/utils
>  > > xorg/hw/dmx
>  > > xorg/hw/dmx/config
>  > > xorg/hw/darwin
>  > > xorg/hw/darwin/utils
>  > > xorg/hw/xwin
>  > > xorg/hw/xwin/xlaunch
>  > >
>  > > For parallelism I'd rather see the Xprint DDX moved under hw and its config
>  > > bits under that:
>  > >
>  > > xorg/hw/Xprint
>  > > xorg/hw/Xprint/XpConfig
>  > > xorg/hw/xfree86
>  > > xorg/hw/xfree86/utils
>  > > ...
>  > >
>  > > Does anyone have a compelling case against this?
>  >
>  > See below.
>  >
>  > > If not I'll probably shuffle
>  > > this around sometime this weekend.
>  >
>  > It does not sound not logical to me - Xprint DDX is no physical
>  > hardware so why should it be tagged as such?
>
> Neither is vfb or nest.
> 'hw' is really the wrong name here. It's historical.
> Better would be 'ddx'.
I do not want the Xprint files moved except hw/ gets renamed to ddx/
first (I wish this hw/ --> ddx/ rename would have been done during
monolithic-->modular transition as the issue seems to be known since
some time... :-().
--
      _        Felix Schulte
    _|_|_     mailto:felix.schulte at gmail.com
    (0 0)
ooO--(_)--Ooo