Simon McVittie writes ("Re: Bug#908747: Default -I and -i option should not
exclude .ignore"):
> I didn't implement this feature, so I could be wrong, but my understanding
> is that the rationale for making it convenient to ignore .gitignore,
> .bzrignore and friends i
On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 at 15:57:48 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Looking more narrowly, it seems to me that: including the .gitignore
> (say) is sometimes helpful, and never harmful. So stripping it out is
> simply a mistake.
I didn't implement this feature, so I could be wrong, but my understanding
Ian Jackson writes ("Default -I and -i option should not exclude .ignore"):
> Changing this has compatibility implications. Many tools assume the
> existing behaviour. I suggest the following transition plan:
Ping?
In particular, (i) do you agree that this should be changed
and if so (ii) what
Julian Andres Klode writes ("Re: Bug#908747: Default -I and -i option should
not exclude .ignore"):
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:26:27PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > The result of this default is that many source packages in the Debian
> > archive are incomplete. [...
On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:26:27PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Package: dpkg-dev
> Version: 1.19.0.5
>
> When the source provided to dpkg-source contains a .ignore file,
> eg a .gitignore, .hgignore, .cvsignore, then that file is part of the
> source code as the maintainer works with it. It
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.19.0.5
When the source provided to dpkg-source contains a .ignore file,
eg a .gitignore, .hgignore, .cvsignore, then that file is part of the
source code as the maintainer works with it. It should be retained in
the source package.
Likewise if the Debian maintainer
6 matches
Mail list logo
