From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add .gitignore files to CVS? |
Date: | 2010-01-09 23:22:52 |
Message-ID: | 603c8f071001091522i7d758041qff89f9e7a7671eaf@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> ... What I'm interested in is being
>> able to run 'git status' on a tree in which I've run a build without
>> getting a lot of extra output, and that will require ignoring all the
>> build products.
>
> I'm fairly hesitant to set up ignore files that list *all* the build
> products (or even all the non-.o ones) because of the probability of
> error --- in particular, the likelihood that this would mask an omission
> in a "make clean" rule. The current charter for .cvsignore is
> relatively safe and low-maintenance because there are so few built files
> that are supposed to remain around in a distribution tree. What you're
> talking about would require a great deal more maintenance effort, and
> I don't see the point compared to using a VPATH build.
That seems to be a common POV, so I think we should just let it go.
...Robert
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tim Bunce | 2010-01-09 23:49:22 | Re: Initial refactoring of plperl.c - updated |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-01-09 23:20:59 | Re: Add .gitignore files to CVS? |