Re: Patch to .gitignore

From: Fabrízio de Royes Mello <fabriziomello(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Pgsql Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Patch to .gitignore
Date: 2013-05-24 03:39:56
Message-ID: CAFcNs+qE57+W3R0Xm+sHDrUMyFO0jKAYH=61C2Ujcx5QRxB-Lw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>wrote:

> There hasn't been general agreement on the merits of particular .gitignore
> rules of this sort.
>
> You could hide your own favorite patterns by putting this into your
> ~/.gitignore that isn't part of the repo, configuring this globally, thus:
> git config --global core.excludesfile '~/.gitignore'
>
>
Yes... I know that...

> That has the consequence that you can hide whatever things your own tools
> like to create, and not worry about others' preferences.
>
> Us Emacs users can put things like *~, #*#, and such into our own "ignore"
> configuration; that doesn't need to bother you, and vice-versa for your
> vim-oriented patterns.
>

I agree with you about vim-oriented patterns, because its a particular
tool, but "ctags" and "etags" be part of postgres source tree and its
generate some output inside them, so I think we must ignore it.

IMHO all output generated by tools inside the source tree that will not be
committed must be added to .gitignore

Regards,

--
Fabrízio de Royes Mello
Consultoria/Coaching PostgreSQL
>> Blog sobre TI: http://fabriziomello.blogspot.com
>> Perfil Linkedin: http://br.linkedin.com/in/fabriziomello
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/fabriziomello

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2013-05-24 03:49:37 Re: getting rid of freezing
Previous Message Christopher Browne 2013-05-24 03:04:10 Re: Patch to .gitignore