Hello Gunnar!

> I marked some issues down with using ignore list.
> Could be some minor
> inconsistencies but perhaps you can shed some light on that.
>
> I created this ignore pattern as a default one
> with the debian package:
>
...
> 1. When I now change the ordering a bit with
> putting the take rule on
> top, the ignore matches beyond are not used.
>
> When I use take beyond ignore:
...
> only . is fetched.
...
> Is this by intention? My suggestion, if the mentioned
> cases could not
> handled more easily, would be to have a strict
> priority of the ignore
> type either "take before ignore" or "ignore before take".
> This is IMO easier to explain to endusers then
> having always an eye on
> the order of rules.
I'm sorry - but the only real alternative would be
"longest match first" - and that doesn't work either,
as pattern matches (and PCRE even more so, even ignoring the mode matches!) 
have no
comparable length.

There has to be a specified order, to make exceptions,
and exceptions of exceptions, and so on ...


And the order in the file is still the easiest way, I believe.

The other ideas I had would be some kind of explicit
ordering by a number, with some flags like "skip rest
of this level" and other complicated things.


So I'm sorry ... but I didn't find a simpler way.


> 2. If you use
>
>> ignore,/
> instead
>> ignore,/**
>
> You will get an message:
>
>> Pattern "ignore,/" too short!
> Using something like
>> take,/etc/fsvs/svn/
> is otherwise accepted.
Yes, IIRC the minimum length is 2 - for "/*".

The WC root directory is never ignored, so some deeper
specification has to be given.


> 3. The ignore list we use is always according static
> to / (root).
>  From my understanding that means if I use the above
> ignore list all
> other directories are excluded. But the issue also
> mentioned in
> http://fsvs.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=3928&dsMessageId=2619672
> still happens that users checkin in their home,
> although it is excluded.
> I dropped the idea of using a default path
> (mentioned in linked post)
> and prefer that nothing should happen in case
> the user is in a excluded
> directory or not using the path in commandline.
> Would that be ok with you?
Hmmm, you'd have to check that a) no arguments are given and b) the cwd is 
ignored; a
message should be printed, I think
(like "Not implicitly adding an ignored directory.").

Else I'd be fine ... I don't think that someone needs the current behaviour.


Regards,

Phil


-- 
Versioning your /etc, /home or even your whole installation?
             Try fsvs (fsvs.tigris.org)!

------------------------------------------------------
http://fsvs.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=3923&dsMessageId=2644078

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [[email protected]].

Reply via email to