AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20070403181040.18071e5e@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:onstor-exch02.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<larry.scheer@onstor.com>,<tim.gardner@onstor.com>,<maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>,<richard.beck@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@onstor-exch02.onstor.net/INBOX	0	BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E022156F4@onstor-exch02.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2007 18:10:49 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: "Larry Scheer" <larry.scheer@onstor.com>
Cc: "Tim Gardner" <tim.gardner@onstor.com>, "Maxim Kozlovsky"
 <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>, "Richard Beck" <richard.beck@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: documentation of changes to cougar branch
Message-ID: <20070403181049.1fef366e@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E022156F4@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
References: <20070403170100.5cd12df5@ripper.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E022156F4@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Tue, 3 Apr 2007 18:02:47 -0700 "Larry Scheer"
<larry.scheer@onstor.com> wrote:

> My initial check-in or two without review were just to get some of the
> Makefiles and rpms in place. I initially bolted stuff in place based
> on where some parts were in the current cougar branch, such as how the
> linux tree was currently laid out. I did this knowing much of it will
> change.
> 
> We need to review what the directory structure for your source should
> look like. The current linux directory structure was laid out by Dan
> Stein and I don't know if it still makes sense for you or Richard's
> stuff. This is what Dan laid out:
> 
> Linux/:
>   arch/  drivers/  include/  init/  kernel/  net/

I'm pretty sure these will be removed, and replaced with a single
directory, like, kernel, where a whole kernel tree complete with git
objects, will reside.  That way the kernel will tuck neatly out of the
way from everything else.

> This appears to be a possible layout for the kernel sources and a
> possible area for shared code between nfx-tree and the kernel. This is
> where Richard's previous work on neteee is found. It can be
> reorganized to better suit our needs. If this looks like the layout
> you expect for your code then you should use these directories for
> your components and new ones if needed.
> 
> I added Pkgs/ and pkg-tools/ This made sense for the package stuff.
> 
> Pkgs contain the RPMs at this time and a place holder for debian
> packages but none are checked in. The directory pkg-tools contain
> checked-in versions of the tools you gave me that fetch and manipulate
> debian packages.
> 
> Max mentioned he doesn't like the location of the neteee includes.
> But I simply used what was there.
> 
> But to answer your REAL question, yes, I will document how things
> work, probably in a wiki page.

The real question include stuff that hasn't happened yet as well as
stuff that has.  So, part design and part doc of existing stuff.
Explain more about the new directories, what's in them and how are
those things hooked into the build and all that.

> Larry
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Sharp 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 5:01 PM
> To: Larry Scheer
> Cc: Tim Gardner; Maxim Kozlovsky
> Subject: documentation of changes to cougar branch
> 
> Hi Larry,
> 
> You've checked in a number of changes and additions to the cougar
> branch without review.  Consequently, nobody knows how the stuff you
> checked in works, where it lives, what the operating theory is ...
> etc.
> 
> Could you write a _brief_ design document that captures all this
> information?  Where things are checked in, how the makefiles work, and
> so on?  Feel free to use whatever format makes you happy: wiki,
> open-document-format, or plain text file.  ~:^)
> 
> That would be a big help.  I'm looking for somewhere to check in my
> kernel bits, but I really don't know where to start.  This will help
> me there but also in other things.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> a
