Catalin Marinas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think it would make more sense for the exclude-per-directory
> patterns to be local to that directory only, without recursively
> preserving them for subdirectories.
I personally do not have preference either way, but am slightly
biased towards the "cumulative" behaviour the patch attempts to
implement, which was what Pasky said he wanted to have.
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 22:59:48 +0200
From: Petr Baudis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Tell vim the textwidth is 75.
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> *3* .gitignore in the cwd is used in Cogito, if I am not
> mistaken.
Yes. There were several discussions about this in the past, with no
clear outcome, IIRC. I would prefer:
~/.git/ignore per-user
/.git/ignore per-repository
.gitignore per-directory (cummulative with parent directories)
>> An exclude pattern is of the following format:
> [...]
>
> That's fine. Actually, the Porcelain would care much about it since it
> gets the information already filtered by git.
Your saying "fine" is a relief. This change aims at helping
Porcelain people by making it less likely for Porcelain to need
its own filtering. As you say, if ls-files filters more than
the Porcelain wants, that's a bigger problem.
>> $ cat Documentation/.gitignore
>> # ignore generated html files,
>> # except foo.html which is maintained by hand
>> !foo.html
>> *.html
>
> Wouldn't it be clearer to have the general rules first (*.html),
> overridden by the more specific ones (!foo.html)? Just my opinion, I
> don't know what others think.
I do not know, either, but I do know it is consistent with the
"first match determines fate" rule and cleaner to implement.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
