Hi, On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 12:34:14AM +0100, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 07:19:29PM +0100, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > * .gitignore: New file. > Generally, I don't like these ignore files too much. But if you > promise to maintain this file (whatever this means -- no maintenance > would have been required in the last years, I guess), and take the rap > should this ever cause any harm due to hiding any files' changes, > etc., then it can go in. Eh? .gitignore files are crucial to make proper use of git-status etc. And updating them is the responsibility of the person making a change that makes an update necessary -- as with any other necessary updates. I consider any repository not having an up to date .ignore file to be broken -- and I doubt there are many people who wouldn't agree. > > The silent rules enabled by default will make it easier to see > > warnings, even if currently you get easily drown by their quantity. > > If there's an error they can be temporarily disabled using ???make > > V=1??? or disabled for the whole build with ???configure > > --disable-silent-rules???. Something I will be doing in the Debian > > package so that we get useful build logs. > > Likewise, this functionality has probably already been the cause for > many men's wasted days discussing its pros and cons in other projects. I haven't seen any such discussion in Xorg. On the contrary: it is something most people have been awaiting for a long long time! For some people it even used to be a reason not to use Automake. (Some projects -- including Xorg -- actually implemented support for an extrenal "shave" script as a workaround, before this was implemented in Automake.) -antrik-
