On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 2:09 AM, Trevor Saunders <tbsau...@tbsaunde.org> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:46:19AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Trevor Saunders <tbsau...@tbsaunde.org> >> wrote: >> > Hi! >> > >> > To be clear I only want to talk about gcc/**/*.c but *not* testsuite/ >> > >> > The Question of changing from .c to a more standard C++ file extension >> > has come up a couple times. I believe its reasonable accurate to say >> > the consensus is moderately in favor of doing this at some point. The >> > biggest concern was of course being able to access pre rename history >> > easily. I know git will either handle this by default or with an option >> > depending on the command, and svn claims it can handle renames so we >> > should be good on that front. The other question was if we should wait >> > to do this at the same time as a reorganization of directory structure. >> > That was back in august 2013, about a year and a half ago, and we >> > haven't done it or really moved forward with a plan to do it. It seems >> > to me that if we do this part now we can then deal with moving files >> > into directories later piece by piece and not need to move everything at >> > once. If we want to go ahead with renaming we should pick a time, I >> > think some people have advanced the idea of doing it just after a >> > branch, on the other hand last year we held off on the big gimple >> > refactoring until after the branch had released a .1. >> > >> > thoughts? >> >> I see no value in doing this but making branch maintainance awkward. > > I think its mostly valuable to cause less confusion of new people, and > though it is a simpler thing every little thing can be the thing that > breaks the cammel's back.
I don't buy this kind of argument given that the switch to C++ has complicated things instead of simplifying them. > Yes its not all that hard to configure > editors and what not to handle it properly, but every new person needs > to do it, and looking up configuration options takes time that can more > profitably be spent. > > That said keeping backports as easy as possible is also certainly > important. I'm curious why renames hurt doing backports, I'm pretty > confident git cherry-pick will handle it for you, and if you like patch > files for some reason I'd think its easy to fix up with sed though > running that for each backport by hand would get a little old. So if git can simplify the issues then the appropriate time to do this mass rename is when we switch to git. Richard. > > Trev > >> >> Richard. >> >> > Trev
