On Jan 7, 2011 8:53 AM, "Matt Robinson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Paul Nasrat <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 6 January 2011 23:22, Matt Robinson <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Paired-with: Jesse Wolfe
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Matt Robinson <[email protected]>
> >> ---
> >>  .gitignore |    1 +
> >>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
> >> index 1e6b959..a208237 100644
> >> --- a/.gitignore
> >> +++ b/.gitignore
> >> @@ -1,2 +1,3 @@
> >>  .rspec
> >>  results
> >> +.*.sw[op]
> >
> > Any reason this needs to be in the project gitignore and not set
> > per-user via a ~/.gitignore configured by
> >
> > git config --global core.excludesfile ~/.gitignore
> >
> > I can see the point of artefacts generated by tests/packaging but
> > editors are a personal choice right :)
>
> It's not a personal choice if people accidentally try to commit .swp
> files to the project (not that this has happened so far as I know),
> and we can't edit users ~/.gitignore files.  Any reason anyone should
> ever want to commit a .swp file to the project?

I fully agree with this: adding routine editor backup files to the project
ignore list costs pretty much nothing and leads to a nicer experience for
everyone who develops on it.

Daniel

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Puppet Developers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/puppet-dev?hl=en.

Reply via email to