On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 13:12, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 1:06 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >>> I suppose you already know my votes, but here they are again just in case. >>> ... >>> Centralize. >>> ... >>> All the build products in a normal build. >> >> I don't understand your preference for this together with a centralized >> ignore file. That will be completely unmaintainable IMNSHO. A >> centralized file would work all right if it's limited to the couple >> dozen files that are currently listed in .cvsignore's, but I can't see >> doing it that way if it has to list every executable and .so built >> anywhere in the tree. You'd get merge conflicts from >> completely-unrelated patches, not to mention the fundamental >> action-at-a-distance nastiness of a top-level file that knows about >> everything going on in every part of the tree. > > Oh. I was just figuring it would be pretty easy to regenerate from > the output of git status. You might have merge conflicts but they'll > be trivial. But then again, the effort of breaking up the output of > git status into individual per-directory files is probably largely a > one-time effort, so maybe it doesn't matter very much.
Breaking it up was quite trivial. Here's what I came up with after building on my box. I'm sure there are some on other platforms showing up, but this should be the majority. I just realized it does not include contrib, but's that a mechanical copy of the same thing. So if we want to go with this way, i have the scripts/changes ready :) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
gitignore.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
