Re: [PATCH v2] LICENSES: modify .gitignore files to be nonempty

From: Geordan Neukum <gneukum1@gmail.com>
To: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Ian Abbott <abbotti@mev.co.uk>,
	Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>,
	u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] LICENSES: modify .gitignore files to be nonempty
Date: Wed, 15 May 2019 00:45:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+T6rvF1oeEWYHKfD0P9s8jmAoQM5Bptyi+agomhWqPs8uK_rQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <929b315f-248b-e5f9-7bc6-926d698611a5@mev.co.uk>

> If the .gitignore is currently only needed as a placeholder to avoid the
> directory being empty, it could be a file that git does not care about
> at all.  Common names for such a file seem to include '.keep' and
> '.gitkeep'.

Fair enough. As Ahmad suggested earlier, I was attempting to force a
cleanup of this file in the future as the new licenses are added. If we
feel strongly enough against using a .gitignore for this purpose, I would
be happy to resubmit the patch using another strategy. A README may also
suffice as a visible reminder that this is only intended to be a temporary
workaround.

Best,
Geordan

On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 12:51 PM Ian Abbott <abbotti@mev.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On 14/05/2019 09:28, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> > On 14/5/19 09:28, Ian Abbott wrote:
> >> On 14/05/2019 03:19, Geordan Neukum wrote:
> >>> The .gitignore files under the LICENSES/exceptions and LICENSES/other
> >>> directories cannot have a size of 0 or else they are subject to removal
> >>> by the make target 'distclean'. Modify the .gitignore files to
> >>> ignore all files except for themselves. These .gitignores can be
> >>> updated further or removed outright as new licenses are added to these
> >>> directories in the future.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Geordan Neukum <gneukum1@gmail.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>    LICENSES/exceptions/.gitignore | 4 ++++
> >>>    LICENSES/other/.gitignore      | 4 ++++
> >>>    2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/LICENSES/exceptions/.gitignore b/LICENSES/exceptions/.gitignore
> >>> index e69de29bb..d5e7eacf3 100644
> >>> --- a/LICENSES/exceptions/.gitignore
> >>> +++ b/LICENSES/exceptions/.gitignore
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
> >>> +# Ignore everything in this directory
> >>> +*
> >>> +# Except for this file
> >>> +!.gitignore
> >>> diff --git a/LICENSES/other/.gitignore b/LICENSES/other/.gitignore
> >>> index e69de29bb..d5e7eacf3 100644
> >>> --- a/LICENSES/other/.gitignore
> >>> +++ b/LICENSES/other/.gitignore
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
> >>> +# Ignore everything in this directory
> >>> +*
> >>> +# Except for this file
> >>> +!.gitignore
> >>>
> >>
> >> I may be missing something, but why not have just a comment line?
> >>
> >
> > One side effect of doing it this way, that it's more likely to remind,
> > whoever `git add`s files to these directories that the .gitignore needs to
> > be removed (unless they have aliased git add to git add -f..).
>
> It may confuse some people for a while, until they figure out what is
> preventing them from adding their file to git.
>
> > Personally, I am fine with both ways, but I would prefer the comment
> > to say something along the lines of:
> >
> >       # Placeholder as upstream checkpatch.pl requires this directory to exist
> >       # This file can be removed when new files are added
>
> If the .gitignore is currently only needed as a placeholder to avoid the
> directory being empty, it could be a file that git does not care about
> at all.  Common names for such a file seem to include '.keep' and
> '.gitkeep'.
>
> --
> -=( Ian Abbott <abbotti@mev.co.uk> || Web: www.mev.co.uk )=-
> -=( MEV Ltd. is a company registered in England & Wales. )=-
> -=( Registered number: 02862268.  Registered address:    )=-
> -=( 15 West Park Road, Bramhall, STOCKPORT, SK7 3JZ, UK. )=-

_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox