Re: Separating obsolete entries from file lists

[Antti Kantee <pooka%cs.hut.fi@localhost>]

On Wed Jun 23 2010 at 19:17:48 +0100, Julio Merino wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I personally find the obsolete entries in the current file list to
> "hide" the actual content of the list.  Just take a look at tests/mi
> and you'll see what I mean :-P
> 
> Would anyone object to splitting these entries out in separate files?
> Say entries in mi end up in mi.obsolete and entries in md.i386 end up
> in md.i386.obsolete.

IMHO setlists aren't meant to be human-readable.  In a perfect world
they would not torment us at all.  Well, even in an acceptably good
world they would not torment us.

Anyway, how does separating obsolete files into another file help your
process of importing a new version of atf?  I don't really see it being
easier this way or that way.  Personally, I introduce so few obsolete
files that it's easier for me to search for the to-be-obsoleted filename
and replace the end of the line with "obsolete" (and get complained to
because i got the syspkg setname wrong).  nb. this is not an objection,
just curiosity.