On 10/14/2011 09:46 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
On Fri, Oct 14 2011, John Dickinson wrote:
But it's metadata about the code (a particular review pattern with a
particular vcs). VCS info does not belong in the code. I'll admit that I
like a dotfile in the repo much better than I like rfc.sh in the repo, but
I'd prefer to keep info about remotes, review processes, and other repo
metadata out of the repo. If this is something for a particular VCS (as the
proposed git-review is), it should use the established locations for that
particular VCS. In this case, git-review should pull info from the .git
directory (more specifically, the git config data).
I understand your statement, but I don't think it is the good thing to
fight for this. You can consider that .gitignore is VCS metadata too.
But it exists everywhere.
Every file is a file particular to a tool used in a project, being
Python, a Makefile, or a Git file. :)
At least as far as the generic tool is concerned, how about support
both? As an example, check out these docs for post-review from the
reviewboard project:
http://www.reviewboard.org/docs/manual/dev/users/tools/post-review/
The equivalent information can either be stored in a dot file or in git
config. Since obviously there are differing opinions, it would be nice
to provide both. Supporting both also provides a convenient way to be
able to locally override the default that is committed into the repository.
--
Russell Bryant
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
