From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED0712022A for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 09:32:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935408AbcJ1JcX (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:32:23 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]:37253 "EHLO mail-wm0-f49.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936477AbcJ1JcU (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Oct 2016 05:32:20 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f49.google.com with SMTP id 140so66958211wmv.0 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:32:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pelly-co.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ds0C1OvEIG7O/thL8bDTXdbw50GhFGp4JrcQFZpN/0A=; b=gLbOoStHu/Bnx2r5zHvHdACcAACkoYZlp2N0wwIP+heGw5ZFlxzLI3/yKS/XFkSTAN Z7l1uGH9qZN1UXthQHQpK8ny1iyEpmVGdMPLKsbcGbvrsbAR3qXWZ4JDnymGbcrioU00 k6RM80wOMp3V5WIGvb8OVnVJoPMKEy8qLPxrJOvFq3vzsIBiEPupKRxzCxqhTV7fAKD0 oP3/ptv2ebFmKc/QHMq8dMiZ906mPUJ9nWPb5VHOdPNH4IqZextzS+wI9SqeJuC1qM33 jY5bD15Gm1zNZWf2k5itJDNFgvWHrHlPGnYAhRWiUiCOLU2tjG9uE8wc9TX6UjYbzF1C eYGQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ds0C1OvEIG7O/thL8bDTXdbw50GhFGp4JrcQFZpN/0A=; b=FheZ6tWvDGv1TxzLcCgyfd1eMCPeKsAgRdIUvi28/BoO6KY72BNU9eYmXiMqUuAkeq iBoX/8/C5dQeGi6SpQ+94o0yrmo6gGMUJZZl9+8piGBcVDlMHCV7esNWFFST3dDF4Vyw OyRulciw4XOiiUL9OUWAKeIcrvB6Okp0VDLDjOxzNLAuI0cwt7WWFT9ftDFtkvYTJDQy ndZt9vi6r7APIbh+Tc2psLQhkrbV4YgSZPKSRVlv5oH8AKbGzM/oBwLpyTtX1ZuH0xyr EWK5c8dt/24MOyxj/g2QeI50H4KjQR7UOjWnUE4RebprVfPhrGydxn3eoa9jnnWrWCy2 Yfmg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvfSz/Hr6yZ6KpGfckgrZQbBXSHtVRG5pYJGV4X+37ZbYAfdXlAL8WolIGLMWQBGZQ== X-Received: by 10.28.130.199 with SMTP id e190mr1320538wmd.110.1477647133134; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:32:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.3.1.6] ([49.50.252.82]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id xq9sm13127265wjb.35.2016.10.28.02.32.10 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 28 Oct 2016 02:32:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Expanding Includes in .gitignore To: Junio C Hamano , Jeff King References: <80919456-7563-2c16-ba23-ce4fcc2777de@pelly.co> <20161027105026.e752znq5jv5a6xea@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161027205508.vqw44zlbnqpj2cvd@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161027210753.btc7zbndhdocsbwa@sigill.intra.peff.net> Cc: git@vger.kernel.org From: Aaron Pelly Message-ID: Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 22:32:07 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 28/10/16 15:54, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > >> However, as I said elsewhere, I'm not convinced this feature is all that >> helpful for in-repository .gitignore files, and I think it does >> introduce compatibility complications. People with older git will not >> respect your .gitignore.d files. Whereas $GIT_DIR/info is purely a local >> matter. > > As I do not see the point of making in-tree .gitignore to a forest > of .gitignore.d/ at all, compatibility complications is not worth > even thinking about, I would have to say. Well; that saves some work. :) I do not suggesting making this mandatory. I think it adds value and it is a common and understood mechanism. But, if it is abhorrent, consider: There is precedent for including files in git-config. This could be extended to ignore files. The code is not similar, but the concept is. I could live with it. Or how about a new githook that can intelligently create or return the details? This would be my least favourite option unless it was configured in an obvious place. Finally, if this is a bad-idea, as I asked in the beginning, I will consider the equine expired, cease flagellation and apologise for the noise.