On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 2:41 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of mié ene 26 19:20:52 -0300 2011: >> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> > On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> >> Ick. That's an awful lot of stuff to have global ignores for. >> >> > The "coverage" directory ignore seems a little icky, but the rest >> > seems unlikely to pick up anything incidental. >> >> Tying /coverage to the root as in his V2 makes that better, > > Hmm, I don't think that works, because you can run "make coverage" in > any subdir and it will create a "coverage" subdir there.
I like being told that I have a coverage directory outstanding when I run "git status". The hundreds of other files, not so much. >> but I'm >> still unexcited about the thesis that we should auto-ignore the results >> of any random tool somebody wants to run in their source tree. > > Well, in this case it's not any random tool, because it's integrated > into our makefiles. I agree. Should this be added to commit-fest 2011-Next? Also, should "make clean-coverage" be changed to remove all of those files from the entire tree and not just root? Cheers, Jeff -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
