Messages in this thread | | | From | Dimitrie Paun <> | Subject | RE: [s-h] Re: ALSA patch for 2.5.2pre9 kernel | Date | Mon, 7 Jan 2002 14:03:26 -0500 |
| |
> From: Linus Torvalds [mailto:torvalds@transmeta.com] > > This is my current feeling. > > However, la donna é mobile, and I'm a primus donna, fer > shure. So don't take it _too_ seriously, continue to argue > the merits of other approaches.
That's good to know. So let's do so:
There is no one grouping: things can be grouped in any number of ways, and for this very reason, a strictly hierarchical grouping does not cut it. What I'm trying to say is that at certain point, a given grouping characteristics becomes less important (say sound) and other (which crosscut other parts of the source) increase in importance (say drivers).
For this reason, I think the current organization (net/core + drivers/net) is more practical then the one which initially screams at any CompSci guy (net/core + net/drivers).
Now, whichever one we choose, I'd _hate_ to see net organized one way and sound the other way. It would be just ugly. That, together with the fact that I don't think that putting everything under sound/ is in any way superior to the current method, I would suggest we stick to: sound/core + drivers/sound.
-- Dimi. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |