[PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason]

Change Git's own .gitignore so that patches produced with git
format-patch don't show up as untracked.

Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
---
 .gitignore |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
index dbf1b90..039d99c 100644
--- a/.gitignore
+++ b/.gitignore
@@ -203,3 +203,4 @@
 *.pdb
 /Debug/
 /Release/
+[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.patch
-- 
1.7.1.84.gd92f8

Re: [PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[Pavan Kumar Sunkara]

Generally I use the format-patch command as:

git format-patch -M origin/master -o outgoing/

So, my patches will be in subdirectory outgoing.
But the regex rule in this patch won't be able to hide them.

What do u want to do in that case ?

- Pavan

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 2:52 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
<avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
> Change Git's own .gitignore so that patches produced with git
> format-patch don't show up as untracked.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .gitignore |    1 +
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
> index dbf1b90..039d99c 100644
> --- a/.gitignore
> +++ b/.gitignore
> @@ -203,3 +203,4 @@
>  *.pdb
>  /Debug/
>  /Release/
> +[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.patch
> --
> 1.7.1.84.gd92f8
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

Re: [PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[Jonathan Nieder]

Pavan Kumar Sunkara wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

>> --- a/.gitignore
>> +++ b/.gitignore
>> @@ -203,3 +203,4 @@
>>  *.pdb
>>  /Debug/
>>  /Release/
>> +[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.patch
[...]
> git format-patch -M origin/master -o outgoing/
> 
> So, my patches will be in subdirectory outgoing.
> But the regex rule in this patch won't be able to hide them.
> 
> What do u want to do in that case ?

Try it out.

In fact, I was worried that this patch would trigger a similar
problem: maybe some test data directory contains format-patch
output?  In fact none do, so I like the patch.

Thanks,
Jonathan

Re: [PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason]

On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 07:52, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Pavan Kumar Sunkara wrote:
>> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
>>> --- a/.gitignore
>>> +++ b/.gitignore
>>> @@ -203,3 +203,4 @@
>>>  *.pdb
>>>  /Debug/
>>>  /Release/
>>> +[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.patch
> [...]
>> git format-patch -M origin/master -o outgoing/
>>
>> So, my patches will be in subdirectory outgoing.
>> But the regex rule in this patch won't be able to hide them.
>>
>> What do u want to do in that case ?
>
> Try it out.

Right, patches in outgoing/ will be ignored too because the rule isn't
prefixed with /, so it works regardless of whether the file is in a
subdirectory or not.

> In fact, I was worried that this patch would trigger a similar
> problem: maybe some test data directory contains format-patch
> output?  In fact none do, so I like the patch.

None do, there's no file that matches '????-*.patch' in Git. Even if
there was you could still 'git add -f' it, which wouldn't be that big
of a problem because it would be part of some rarely touched test
suite in t/*.

Re: [PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[Michael J Gruber]

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason venit, vidit, dixit 15.05.2010 23:22:
> Change Git's own .gitignore so that patches produced with git
> format-patch don't show up as untracked.
> 

Does the git build process call format-patch? No! The .gitignore we
distribute is meant for things the build process creates, not for
imposing a specific workflow on developers.

If you want to ignore format patch output, simply use .git/info/excludes
or a global excludes file, but please don't force everyone else to live
with that or work around it.

Cheers,
Michael

> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
> ---
>  .gitignore |    1 +
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore
> index dbf1b90..039d99c 100644
> --- a/.gitignore
> +++ b/.gitignore
> @@ -203,3 +203,4 @@
>  *.pdb
>  /Debug/
>  /Release/
> +[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.patch

Re: [PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[Jonathan Nieder]

Michael J Gruber wrote:

> Does the git build process call format-patch? No! The .gitignore we
> distribute is meant for things the build process creates

Ah, true.  I seem to remember a thread long ago about whether to
include editor droppings in .gitignore, but I can’t find it in
the git or lkml archive.

git’s .gitignore does not include .*.swp, \#*#, *~, indeed.

>> +[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.patch

So nack from me as well.  It is nice that the .gitignore file we track
does not have to change with fashions, and this way each user can set
up a personal excludesfile according to choice of tools without
interference.

Maybe there should be a reasonable "default" .gitexcludes file in
gitignore.5 as an example, but that is a different topic[1].

Thanks for the reminder,
Jonathan

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/96220/focus=96289

[PATCH] Remove editor-specific droppings from .gitignore

[Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason]

Git's own .gitignore files should only contain things created by Git's
build systems, not editor-specific droppings.

See the discussion following the "[PATCH] Add git format-patch
produced patches to .gitignore" thread
(<1273958566-7328-1-git-send-email-avarab@gmail.com>).
---

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 01:35, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Michael J Gruber wrote:
>
>> Does the git build process call format-patch? No! The .gitignore we
>> distribute is meant for things the build process creates
>
> Ah, true. I seem to remember a thread long ago about whether to
> include editor droppings in .gitignore, but I can’t find it in
> the git or lkml archive.
>
> git’s .gitignore does not include .*.swp, \#*#, *~, indeed.

Thanks both of you, I stand corrected. Anyway, I guess this is a bug
then. It's the only thing ignored by Git's various .gitignore files
that isn't created by the build system.

 git-gui/po/.gitignore |    1 -
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/git-gui/po/.gitignore b/git-gui/po/.gitignore
index a89cf44..e358dd1 100644
--- a/git-gui/po/.gitignore
+++ b/git-gui/po/.gitignore
@@ -1,2 +1 @@
 *.msg
-*~
-- 
1.7.1.84.gd92f8

Re: [PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[Jonathan Nieder]

Michael J Gruber wrote:

> If you want to ignore format patch output, simply use .git/info/excludes
> or a global excludes file, but please don't force everyone else to live
> with that or work around it.

Side note: I said with similar intent that this allows developers to
work “without interference”.  This was a poor choice of words on my
part: a too-long .gitignore only prevents me from noticing and
tracking files that others considered not worth tracking.

From the thread I faintly remembered and then linked to[1]: ;-)

  I earlier said that "*~" should not be in project-wide .gitignore
  file because use of Emacs vs vi is a matter of personal taste, and
  Emacs specific "*~" pattern does not belong to a project policy,
  just like vim "*.swp" pattern doesn't.

  But I think that reasoning is flawed.  The right criteria should not
  be about "use of Emacs vs vi", but about "do we in this project ever
  want to track files that match *~ or *.swp as legitimate contents".
  If a project expects not to have a tracked file whose name ends with
  ".swp", even if it does _not_ mean to encourage use of vim over
  Emacs or any other editor, I think it is fine to add such to its
  tracked .gitignore file for its developer's benefit.

This does not change my conclusion: there are many other reasons to
leave files produced outside the build process unlisted:

 . consistency: to keep the file intuitive and avoid a lot of
   patch churn, it is nicest to choose one rule and stick to it

 . simplicity: shorter .gitignore.  Making the appropriate content
   of .gitignore depend on the behavior of too many text editors
   (and IDEs, and foreign VCSes, and debugging tools, and ...)
   makes it hard to maintain.  See qt’s .gitignore for an example
   of this.

 . correctness: for the case of format-patch, it is hard to say
   "we will never want to track files that match ????-*.patch as
   legitimate contents".  In fact, it is likely such files may need
   to be added to the test suite.

And unlike .o files and company, it does not seem likely that
formatted patches need to be kept around during development.

I hope that is a little clearer.  Sorry for the ramble.
Jonathan

[1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/96220/focus=96294

Re: [PATCH] Add git format-patch produced patches to .gitignore

[Michael J Gruber]

Jonathan Nieder venit, vidit, dixit 17.05.2010 04:22:
> Michael J Gruber wrote:
> 
>> If you want to ignore format patch output, simply use .git/info/excludes
>> or a global excludes file, but please don't force everyone else to live
>> with that or work around it.
> 
> Side note: I said with similar intent that this allows developers to
> work “without interference”.  This was a poor choice of words on my
> part: a too-long .gitignore only prevents me from noticing and
> tracking files that others considered not worth tracking.
> 
> From the thread I faintly remembered and then linked to[1]: ;-)
> 
>   I earlier said that "*~" should not be in project-wide .gitignore
>   file because use of Emacs vs vi is a matter of personal taste, and
>   Emacs specific "*~" pattern does not belong to a project policy,
>   just like vim "*.swp" pattern doesn't.
> 
>   But I think that reasoning is flawed.  The right criteria should not
>   be about "use of Emacs vs vi", but about "do we in this project ever
>   want to track files that match *~ or *.swp as legitimate contents".
>   If a project expects not to have a tracked file whose name ends with
>   ".swp", even if it does _not_ mean to encourage use of vim over
>   Emacs or any other editor, I think it is fine to add such to its
>   tracked .gitignore file for its developer's benefit.

I think I meant to object back then but concluded it made no difference.
My mathematically deformed^Weducated mind tells me that "do we...
contents" means we should put everything in .gitignore except what we
expect to track. So, here the literal understanding certainly differs
from the intended definition ;)

> 
> This does not change my conclusion: there are many other reasons to
> leave files produced outside the build process unlisted:
> 
>  . consistency: to keep the file intuitive and avoid a lot of
>    patch churn, it is nicest to choose one rule and stick to it
> 
>  . simplicity: shorter .gitignore.  Making the appropriate content
>    of .gitignore depend on the behavior of too many text editors
>    (and IDEs, and foreign VCSes, and debugging tools, and ...)
>    makes it hard to maintain.  See qt’s .gitignore for an example
>    of this.
> 
>  . correctness: for the case of format-patch, it is hard to say
>    "we will never want to track files that match ????-*.patch as
>    legitimate contents".  In fact, it is likely such files may need
>    to be added to the test suite.
> 
> And unlike .o files and company, it does not seem likely that
> formatted patches need to be kept around during development.
> 
> I hope that is a little clearer.  Sorry for the ramble.
> Jonathan

I haven't found the rambling part in your post yet but agree everything
is clearer now :)

Michael

P.S.: I'm fine with Ævar's revised patch, of course. ACK
> 
> [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/96220/focus=96294