Alexey Varlamov wrote:
24.11.06, Geir Magnusson Jr.<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> написал(а):
Alexey Varlamov wrote:
> Geir,
> This was a bit emotional maybe... Sure, any way it will be is not
> lethal, and I do not mind it too much.
What, the veto? I didn't take it that way :) My point was that when
someone puts up a "-1", it really gets people's attention as a strong
position.
> My point is if you modify "official" x-list you most certainly won't
> lose it off track, while local svn-ignored file have a good chance to
> hang around for a while. OTOH, is there any difference which file to
> edit? I suppose no, hence this is almost useless in my POV.
I agree you won't lose it, but when it's in a file that isn't meant for
purely personal use then you have problems in being sure not to commit
it, having to deal with merge conflicts, etc.
I think about it in the same spirit of the drlvm.properties.example -
people copy to an un-svn-ed local copy for local config. Excluding
tests while you are working on something is that kind of thing.
Nope - drlvm.properties fixes stable state of things, you set it and
forget it; most merging conflicts are just bothering fuss.
No - there is no merging conflict for drlvm.properties, as it's not in
SVN. And you can do wacky things with drlvm.properties - like point to
a modified classlib.
Excluding tests should be momentary and ideally not happening at all,
so some minor inconveniences may be paying here. And even merging
conflict should justly draw your attention - maybe your modification
is not that local.
I think that we can't legislate this - if people need them, they'll use
it or find a way around it, like explicitly excluding tests, and if they
don't, they won't.
IOW, it's a convenience for those that need it.
> If you really want it, I've withdrawn my veto.
No :) I'd like to come to consensus. You may even convince me it's not
a good idea.
I think that maybe one solution that may address your concerns would be
to actually put the file under SVN! Then
a) you'll notice when there's something in it - the state of the file in
SVN should always be empty
b) If you forget and commit, someone can flag it.
This would also solve that problem with non-existing file.
But, now this adds even less value - the only difference from
mainstream x-lists is somewhat lesser chance for conflicts :).
And therefore no harm right? So I'm not going to waste time trying to
convince you of the value if you can't see it. But have we come to
agreement that there's no real danger?
geir
