Encoding branch and globs (Was: Re: [ANN] ezbzr 0.2)

[Jan Hudec]

On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 14:34:27 -0600, John A Meinel wrote:
> Jan Hudec wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 13:13:00 -0600, John A Meinel wrote:
> > Well, there is this
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.bazaar-ng.general/7702
> > post from Robert Collins. There is no real final word in the thread.
> > 
> 
> I remember that now. And I did want to comment on it.
> 
> Specifically, we do need a marker to indicate that we are using an old
> versus a new .bzrignore.
> 
> The reason is that for old revisions, we included the built-in entries.
> While in the future, we are going to write all the built-in ones into
> .bzrignore, and then not use the builtin ones.
> 
> I'm not very concerned about the tiny semantic difference between your
> glob matcher and the current one. I am concerned that when we stop using
> built-in globs, all old revisions will show up with tons of '.pyc' files
> that aren't considered ignored.
> 
> I don't know that it should block getting the new glob matcher into bzr,
> but we definitely need to worry about it when we change how we handle
> .bzrignore.

Than doing both together might have some merit.

Now the question is how the marker should look. I guess when people will use
'bzr ignore' mostly, we can add a little header.

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb at ucw.cz>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060127/8a0e0b13/attachment.pgp