Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)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, 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.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Kevin Grittner||Date: 2011-01-26 22:26:07|
|Subject: Re: .gitignore patch for coverage builds|
|Previous:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2011-01-26 22:20:47|
|Subject: Re: new compiler warnings|