Re: Third party .gitignore .hgignore

["Kamil Rytarowski" <n54%gmx.com@localhost>]

> Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2015 at 6:54 PM
> From: "Joerg Sonnenberger" <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>
> To: "Kamil Rytarowski" <n54%gmx.com@localhost>, tech-repository%netbsd.org@localhost
> Subject: Re: Third party .gitignore .hgignore
>
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 08:23:48PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 08:18:48PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > > I would go one step further and just say leave them all alone. Some of
> > > them don't even make sense, so any resolution should happen with the
> > > corresponding upstream...
> > 
> > Can you explain why we need to have these files in the CVS repository?
> > 
> > We remove many other random files from upstream distributions as well
> > if we think we don't need them.
> 
> You are asking the wrong question. Why should we remove them? Given that
> they come from upstream, they supposedly serve a purpose? I don't know
> when git uses .gitignore, but CVS certainly allows committing a file
> which is on the ignore list by overriding it appropiately.
> 

This affects the workflow of tarballing the fetched sources in git.
Part of the files in tree is blacklisted after: git add -A && git commit.

It's possible to enforce `git add' with `-f', but someone must be aware
of the problem. I lost some time when I was taking my code to a remote
computer and saw build failures in the stages like toolchain creation.

I would assume that I won't be the last person to fall into this trap.