Open Stack

On 4 January 2014 08:31, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:

> I really don't understand the aversion to allowing contributors to
> police on their own what files they do and don't commit in a review
> to an OpenStack project. It all boils down to the following
> balancing act:

I have *no* aversion to allowing contributors to police things on
their own. I have an aversion to forcing them to do so.

>  * Reviewing changes to each project's .gitignore for the trashfile
>    patterns of every editor and IDE known to man is a waste of
>    reviewers' collective time.

This is a strawman. If we have to review for a trashfile pattern then
we have contributors using that. There are more editors than
contributors :).

>  * Having to point out to contributors that they've accidentally
>    added trashfiles created by their arbitrary choice of tools to a
>    change in review is also a waste of reviewers' collective time.
>
> Since there are ways for a contributor to configure their
> development environment in a manner which prevents them from
> inadvertently putting these files into a change for review, I feel
> like it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that as an alternative. It
> is just one of the many ways a contributor avoids wasting reviewer
> time by neither polluting their changes nor every project's
> .gitignore with details potentially relevant only to their own
> personal development system and nowhere else.

I don't understand why you call it polluting. Pollution is toxic. What
is toxic about the few rules needed to handle common editors?

-Rob


-- 
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud