26.11.06, Geir Magnusson Jr.<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> написал(а):
Alexey Varlamov wrote: > 24.11.06, Geir Magnusson Jr.<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> написал(а): >> >> >> Alexey Varlamov wrote: >> > Geir, >> > This was a bit emotional maybe... Sure, any way it will be is not >> > lethal, and I do not mind it too much. >> >> What, the veto? I didn't take it that way :) My point was that when >> someone puts up a "-1", it really gets people's attention as a strong >> position. >> >> > My point is if you modify "official" x-list you most certainly won't >> > lose it off track, while local svn-ignored file have a good chance to >> > hang around for a while. OTOH, is there any difference which file to >> > edit? I suppose no, hence this is almost useless in my POV. >> >> I agree you won't lose it, but when it's in a file that isn't meant for >> purely personal use then you have problems in being sure not to commit >> it, having to deal with merge conflicts, etc. >> >> I think about it in the same spirit of the drlvm.properties.example - >> people copy to an un-svn-ed local copy for local config. Excluding >> tests while you are working on something is that kind of thing. > Nope - drlvm.properties fixes stable state of things, you set it and > forget it; most merging conflicts are just bothering fuss. No - there is no merging conflict for drlvm.properties, as it's not in SVN. And you can do wacky things with drlvm.properties - like point to a modified classlib. > Excluding tests should be momentary and ideally not happening at all, > so some minor inconveniences may be paying here. And even merging > conflict should justly draw your attention - maybe your modification > is not that local. I think that we can't legislate this - if people need them, they'll use it or find a way around it, like explicitly excluding tests, and if they don't, they won't. IOW, it's a convenience for those that need it. > >> >> > If you really want it, I've withdrawn my veto. >> >> No :) I'd like to come to consensus. You may even convince me it's not >> a good idea. >> >> I think that maybe one solution that may address your concerns would be >> to actually put the file under SVN! Then >> >> a) you'll notice when there's something in it - the state of the file in >> SVN should always be empty >> >> b) If you forget and commit, someone can flag it. > > This would also solve that problem with non-existing file. > But, now this adds even less value - the only difference from > mainstream x-lists is somewhat lesser chance for conflicts :).
> And therefore no harm right? So I'm not going to waste time trying to > convince you of the value if you can't see it. But have we come to > agreement that there's no real danger? Yes, if it is not svn-ignored.
geir
