Re: .gitignore files, take two

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: .gitignore files, take two
Date: 2010-09-21 19:01:00
Message-ID: AANLkTi=y8dMTgf1DJz7Bx2bhFDvyyW6tZ8SR1_GanWzp@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 20:59, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 20:21, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>>> On tis, 2010-09-21 at 11:27 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>>> rather than global ignore patterns for *.a and *.so.[0-9]
>>>
>>> Probably rather *.so.[0-9.]+
>
>> Any particular reason not to just do .so.*?
>
> Just paranoia, I guess.  I can't actually see a reason why we'd have
> any committable files in the tree matching that pattern.  OTOH, we
> probably also need the same type of pattern for .sl and .dylib,
> so at some point a more conservative pattern would be wise.

Do we know what the exact pattern would be for .sl and .dylib? Are
they following the same basic pattern of .sl.<major>.<minor>?

--
 Magnus Hagander
 Me: http://www.hagander.net/
 Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Abhijit Menon-Sen 2010-09-21 19:24:42 Re: Git conversion status
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-09-21 18:59:00 Re: .gitignore files, take two