Comment by dofm

1 day ago

Re: per-user ignores:

> For example, if you’re on macOS, adding .DS_Store here would be ideal.

As long as every Mac user on your project does. If you have more than one, it may be better off taken out of everyone's hands.

14 comments

dofm

Reply
tom_  1 day ago

I couldn't say for sure where it came from, but both my Macs (one with Ventura, one with Sequoia) have a ~/.gitignore_global file with an entry for .DS_Store, plus whatever stuff in the global git config makes git ignore stuff mentioned in that file.

This file on my newer Mac is dated 2 days before I ordered it, and I don't remember setting any of this up, so I assume it came like this out of the box. I can't remember the dates for my older Mac, but I assume it's the same thing - and the macOS versions suggest that the default setup might have been like this for a while now.

So, perhaps the days of having to add .DS_Store/ to your .gitignore file are over!

  • dofm  1 day ago

    Perhaps that is the norm for the command line tools now anyway, yes.

tremon  1 day ago

That's a very particular way to frame the few vs the many. If a single macOS user works on ten different projects, should all ten projects add that line, or may things be better off taken out of each project's hands and on that single user?

  • deathanatos  1 day ago

    > If a single macOS user works on ten different projects, should all ten projects add that line,

    Not only do people think that, they also think that every pet tool that every pet user might decide to use should also end up cluttering up .gitignores for every project on earth. Worse, these people have created whole templates for this, so they can start a new project with ignores for dozens of tools they don't even use. 9 out of 10 times, this includes a broken ignore for Vim swap files.

    I think these people are crazy, and like you suggest, tooling that is particular to you should go in the user's ignore, and tooling particular to the project should go into the repo's ignore.

    • dofm  1 day ago

      I mean I was just making a quick pragmatic suggestion about a labour-saving change that might be more sensible in practice, given that, rather than being a "pet tool" from a "pet user", it's a default side-effect of a platform that is modestly common in the hands of open source developers (as well as a common accidental side-effect from handling tarballs supplied by Mac users to non-Mac users).

      But I wouldn't want to deny anyone an opportunity to regularly rehash a narrow tribal complaint in the comments on a pull request. Yeesh.

  • dofm  1 day ago

    I mean sure, if you're this worried about ten bytes and prefer instead to spend time endlessly lecturing new Mac-based submitters about the additional overhead of supporting Mac-based submitters.