Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: .gitignore

[wireless]

On 08/13/2015 05:28 PM, Duncan wrote:
> wireless posted on Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:33:13 -0500 as excerpted:
>
>> On 08/12/2015 09:52 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On 12 Aug 2015 18:27, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>>>> 2)  There is another alternate location that you can define files to
>>>> ignore locally without having to commit them to .gitignore.
>>>> Consider .gitignore a global setting.  There is another setting inside
>>>> .git/info/exclude which is a local config file that will persist and
>>>> not be affected by pulls.
>>>
>>> as i stated, there's no reason for these paths to ever be committed.
>>> conversely, some people (not unreasonably so) will place files in there
>>> that have historically had known meanings.  adding these to the global
>>> gitignore is simply the right thing to do and negatively impacts no
>>> one.
>>
>> As a gentoo user now coding again, I find the need to have things
>> "logically organized" really helps in my efforts. Like most others, I
>> get codes from a variety of places and try to follow the 'logical gentoo
>> organization'. I use /usr/local/portage extensively for ebuilds that I
>> develop. There is also /opt/ which seems to collect up a variety of
>> ebuilds

> Confused...
>
> What do /opt and /usr/local/portage have to do with the gentoo
> repo's .gitignore, which should only need ignore settings for locations
> inside the main tree, /usr/portage by default?  A .gitignore listing for
> /usr/portage/local and /usr/portage/distfiles, etc, makes sense, since
> that's inside the default tree location.  But /opt and /usr/local/portage
> aren't inside that default location and are thus about as apropos to that
> as the price of tea on Mars, aren't they?

<snip>
/distfiles/
/local/
/packages/
<end/snip>

Other postings in this thread mention /var/ and /usr/....
My bad, I thought those official directories  that were up for 
discussion on gitignore relevancy?

 > /usr/portage/local was the original location for the user's own
 > personal ebuild space - an "overlay" if you will.
 > /usr/portage/distfiles and /usr/portage/packages are there because
 > that's where ports has put them for decades, and no-one has gotten
 > around to changing it in portage yet. FreeBSD defines the use of /usr
 > very differently to what Linux users are used to.
 >
 > Those dirs really should be in /var/portage, and the user's overlay
 > has no business being under main tree itself


Ok, so why is net-analyzer/jffnms found in /usr/portage/distfiles yet it 
is installed in /opt/ ?  If jffnms was (properly) installed like other 
net-analyzer packages, would it not be in the portage tree? There is no 
reason for it to remain in /opt/, that I'm aware of.
But jffnms could benefit form gitignore as other packages do, regardless
of where it is installed.


Looking at the documentation for gitignore it would seem that the 
benefits of using gitignore on those /opt/ packages could be useful; so 
would it not be up to the particular package maintainer to make that 
decision? Regardless of where non-devs develop packages for gentoo,
using gitignore might be useful during the development of the packages,
particularly if it is destine for the portage tree (eventually).

Apologies in advance if I have missed some key points already 
established by the gentoo dev community.... I'm certainly no whiz with git*.



James