On Dec 11, 2007 10:25 AM, Luciano Rocha <luciano@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 10:57:46PM +0100, Björn Steinbrink wrote: > > On 2007.12.10 20:29:11 +0000, Luciano Rocha wrote: > FWIW, I also think that trying to keep a coherent stat with automatic > commits isn't possible. As for the temporary, unneeded files, a > exclusion pattern will suffice, and using .git directly, instead of a > (FUSE) filesystem, will allow permanent storage of those temporary > files, until explicitly removed. As a data point, I find it easier for my work to have rules that specify the files you DO want to keep. (I actually have a set of common suffixes to ignore that's checked first but purely for efficiency: it's quicker to throw out the usual suspects like *~, *.o, *.pyc, etc, immediately rather than fail to match all the more complicated "keep this" rules every single time.) One advantage of this is that if I do something stupid like drop a 2G video file into the tracked tree it's doesn't get sucked in to the git repo. -- cheers, dave tweed__________________________ david.tweed@xxxxxxxxx Rm 124, School of Systems Engineering, University of Reading. "we had no idea that when we added templates we were adding a Turing- complete compile-time language." -- C++ standardisation committee - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
