Mass git migration

[Kristian Høgsberg]

On 6/29/06, Donnie Berkholz <spyderous at gentoo.org> wrote:
> Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 11:08:34PM -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> >> Finally, there's the issue of naming, prefixes and postfixes.  Looking
> >> at the modules that have already been converted, it looks like
> >> libraries have (re-) gained a 'lib' prefix (xorg-lib-libXrandr) and
> >> proto modules are now lowercase with 'proto' suffixes
> >> (xorg-proto-damageproto).  There was a fair bit of discussion about
> >> naming during the modularization process and what's in CVS now is what
> >> was agreed on.  I haven't seen any reasoning for adding this
> >> redundancy to the module names, plus it'd be a pain to support in the
> >> script.  So the script doesn't do that, and I'm suggesting we should
> >> rename the few git repositories that have been converted.  Note that
> >> while changing git history is practically infeasible, just changing a
> >> repo name isn't a big deal.
> >
> > The module name is, in the libXrandr case, 'libxrandr'.  /xorg/lib is
> > just extraneous path information.  Having the tarball name as the module
> > name seems to be relatively sensible to me.
>
> Exactly. In the CVS world, the lib/ prefix was actually part of the
> repository. In git, the repository is just 'libxrandr', so it makes
> sense to me to change this upon a migration to git since there is no
> further path in the repository to provide information.

Well, the git repository is libXrandr, not libxrandr.  But ok. The
protocol modules that have been converted does however randomly
lowercase the module name.  For damage, the module name is
DamageProto, and the repo name should be the same.  I hate typing
mixed caps names as much as anyone, but I'll take that over this
inconsistency.

Anyway, we can change the repo names around later if we come up with
something clever, for now I'll change the script to prefix 'lib' to
library modues and add 'Proto' to protocol modules.

cheers,
Kristian