Re: [hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-17 Thread Michael Forney
On 2019-06-17, Quentin Rameau wrote: >> On 2019-06-17, Quentin Rameau wrote: >> >> How do you deal with ~250 lines of "Untracked files:" in the `git >> >> status` output? Can you answer this question? I'm curious why this doesn't obstruct your workflow. >> >> If you want to see them, you can al

Re: [hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-17 Thread Quentin Rameau
> On 2019-06-17, Quentin Rameau wrote: > >> How do you deal with ~250 lines of "Untracked files:" in the `git > >> status` output? > >> > >> If you want to see them, you can always run `git status --ignored`. > > > > If you want it, you can always run `make .gitignore` *once*. > > Once for every

Re: [hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-17 Thread Michael Forney
On 2019-06-17, Quentin Rameau wrote: >> How do you deal with ~250 lines of "Untracked files:" in the `git >> status` output? >> >> If you want to see them, you can always run `git status --ignored`. > > If you want it, you can always run `make .gitignore` *once*. Once for every clone of sbase. >

Re: [hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-17 Thread Quentin Rameau
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 13:40:47 -0700 Michael Forney wrote: > On 2019-06-17, Quentin Rameau wrote: > >> What's the downside to having it checked into the repository? Are > >> there any reasons why a user wouldn't want this feature? Personally, I > >> want it in every clone of sbase I make, and I im

Re: [hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-17 Thread Michael Forney
On 2019-06-17, Quentin Rameau wrote: >> What's the downside to having it checked into the repository? Are >> there any reasons why a user wouldn't want this feature? Personally, I >> want it in every clone of sbase I make, and I imagine most other >> people want this as well. It is annoying to hav

Re: [hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-17 Thread Quentin Rameau
> > I'm not really keen on pushing this file to the source history, I think > > this should be kept separate, this is a user-side feature. > > What's the downside to having it checked into the repository? Are > there any reasons why a user wouldn't want this feature? Personally, I > want it in eve

Re: [hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-17 Thread Michael Forney
On 2019-06-13, Quentin Rameau wrote: > Hello Michael, > >> Also, add rule to regenerate in case executable list changes. >> --- >> Any objection to this? > > I'm not really keen on pushing this file to the source history, I think > this should be kept separate, this is a user-side feature. What's

Re: [hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-13 Thread Quentin Rameau
Hello Michael, > Also, add rule to regenerate in case executable list changes. > --- > Any objection to this? I'm not really keen on pushing this file to the source history, I think this should be kept separate, this is a user-side feature. But having a rule un the Makefile, as you did, is a goo

[hackers] [sbase] [PATCH] Add .gitignore

2019-06-13 Thread Michael Forney
Also, add rule to regenerate in case executable list changes. --- Any objection to this? .gitignore | 99 ++ Makefile | 5 ++- 2 files changed, 103 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) create mode 100644 .gitignore diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitign