On 12/06/13 20:35, Eduardo Lima (Etrunko) wrote: > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Tom Hacohen <tom.haco...@samsung.com> wrote: >> On 12/06/13 15:37, Eduardo Lima (Etrunko) wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:16 AM, Tom Hacohen <tom.haco...@samsung.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Hey, >>>> >>>> Any specific reason for that? >>> >>> Yes, I was bored and with nothing else to do. No, seriously, as I >>> added a new example to eldbus and the executable to gitignore I >>> actually did it first on the respective subdir, but only then I found >>> that we had only one gitignore on the root dir. Of course, there are >>> both advantages and disadvantages for either approach, and no matter >>> what arguments we have for each, I know that it will end up being a >>> matter of taste. >>> >>> So, in my opinion, efl, elm and e projects have grown past the limit >>> of a single gitignore on the root dir. I discussed it briefly on the >>> chanel yesterday and decided to follow the kernel style. Looking at it >>> now, I guess I should have added a comment on the begining of the root >>> gitignore too. >>> >>> http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.9.5/.gitignore >> >> >> OK, cool. Could you please add the comment then? So it'll have a better >> chance of being maintained over time? >> > > Done, I've just copied the comments from the linux kernel. Now all our > codebase must be converted to GPLv2. :P
You forgot to add them to AUTHORS. -- Tom. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: Build for Windows Store. http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
