Open Stack

On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Robert Collins
<robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
> On 1 January 2014 06:07, Joe Gordon <joe.gordon0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>
>>
>> I am not sure if this is the global .gitignore you are thinking of but this
>> is the one I am in favor of:
>>
>> https://help.github.com/articles/ignoring-files#global-gitignore
>>
>>
>> Maintaining .gitignore in 30+ repositories for a potentially infinite number
>> of editors is very hard, and thankfully we have an easier way to do it.
>
> This is a strawman argument: noone (that I know of) has proposed
> adding all editors to all repositories. There are in reality a few
> very common editors and having their extensions present in per
> repository .gitignores does absolutely *no harm*. There is no reason
> not to have sane and sensible defaults in our repositories.
>
> If we are wasting time adding and removing patterns, then I think that
> counts as a harm, so it is a sensible discussion to have to come to a
> project standard, but the standard should be inclusive and useful, not
> just useful for power users that have everything setup 'just so'. Many
> contributors are using git for the first time when they contribute to
> OpenStack, and getting git setup correctly is itself daunting [for new
> users].
>
> So I'm very much +1 on having tolerance for the top 5-10 editor
> patterns in our .gitignores, -1 on *ever* having a bug open to change
> this in any repository, and getting on with our actual task here of
> writing fantastic code.
>
> If folk *really* don't want editor files in .gitignore (and given the
> complete lack of harm I would -really- like a explanation for this
> mindset) then we could solve the problem more permanently: we know
> what files need to be added - *.rst, *.py, *.ini, [!.]* and a few
> others. Everything else is junk and shouldn't be added. By
> whitelisting patterns w
e will support all editors except those whose
> working file names match names we'd genuinely want to add.
>
> -Rob
>
> --
> Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
> Distinguished Technologist
> HP Converged Cloud
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


> If we are wasting time adding and removing patterns, then I think that
> counts as a harm, so it is a sensible discussion to have to come to a
> project standard, but the standard should be inclusive and useful, not
> just useful for power users that have everything setup 'just so'. Many
> contributors are using git for the first time when they contribute to
> OpenStack, and getting git setup correctly is itself daunting [for new
> users].

My point exactly is that this is creating churn and there is some back
and forth (see links to LP items below).  Like I said, I don't have an
objection, I just want to be consistent and move on.  This has come up
in commits in past releases as well.  As I said, I see little harm in
having them present, however I see significant harm in racking up
commits to take them in and out as well as the ugliness in having
inconsistent policies in different projects.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+bug/1256043
https://bugs.launchpad.net/trove/+bug/1257279
https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-cinderclient/+bug/1255876