Hallo, Mathieu Bouchard hat gesagt: // Mathieu Bouchard wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jan 2006, Frank Barknecht wrote:
Why does Gridflow have all these directories? base bin bridge bundled cpu devices4ruby doc extra format images java optional pd_abstractions pd_examples pd_help
This question may seem like a parallel to my questions, but there's a big difference: I'm talking about ideal conventions for a fresh new project, whereas your question asks about an existing project with 5 years of baggage ...
It's not that different at all: The Pd repository is old, too, and it unlike Gridflow it even was organized not by one, but by manymany developers. With some strange results, but at least it has found one rule: Externals that have to be compiled are kept below "externals".
Now you suddenly want to put a tiny single external into "abstractions", where so far only Pd patches are kept.
Instead of providing a really convincing reason why the rule should be broken and why just this external shouldn't be put where all the other externals are you keep asking Hans why CVS is organized the way it is, knowing that the answer is: Because it evolved that way.
Around this evolution, a lot of other evolutions took place: The build system(s) for externals, documentation, packages for distributions, etc. People run their own installations of Pd and they rightfully expect, that what is below "abstractions" can be installed by adding it to the pd-path and be done with it.
Of course there are lots of different and better ways thinkable how to organize the CVS. But any reorganization becomes even harder, if even the most simple conventions are broken without need.
I'd suggest, just do as [hid] does and put PureUnity below "externals". It will make life easier later IMO. There already are a lot of abstractions in "externals" but no externals in "abstractions".
Ciao