.gitignore Isn't the Only Way to Ignore Files in Git

106 pointsposted 6 hours ago
by FergusArgyll
(nelson.cloud)

26 Comments

kevincox

7 minutes ago

The global/user wide exclude is a feature that should be more widely known. I frequently have people submitting changes to add their IDE/OS/AI/... files to every project's .gitignore. They are almost always pleasantly surprised when I tell them that they can add them to their standard configuration and have them ignored everywhere without bothering every project and without risk of accidentally committing them on a project where they haven't updated the .gitignore yet.

My general rule is that in-repo .gitignore should only be used for repo-specific things (build outputs, dependency folders, ...) and most user tools should be in their own user config.

hk1337

2 hours ago

~/.config/git/ignore and ~/.config/git/config is the proper place for your global git config and ignore instead of creating a ~/.gitignore_global and changing the config. IMO.

my dotfiles are a lot smaller at the root level taking advantage of the ~/.config/ for a lot more things.

the git exclude isn't used as much because it doesn't get committed to the repository so you'd have to recreate it each time you wanted to use it. that doesn't mean they're bad just why they are not used.

b40d-48b2-979e

an hour ago

As a bonus, you can (should?) version control your `~/.config` dir to enable future revisions and sharing.

hk1337

an hour ago

Absolutely. On that subject, I prefer the Atlassian method for storing dotfiles in git but sometimes I feel like it's Mootools vs jQuery all over again.

wpollock

34 minutes ago

One point of clarification: with git, "global" means per-user, not "machine-wide. (I never understood why "--global" wasn't better named, maybe "--user".) That's why these pathnames are in a user's home (the "~" means the current user's home directory).

Machine-wide configuration is called "system" in git, and generally lives under "/etc".

bryancoxwell

2 hours ago

I use the ever living hell out of .git/info/exclude. Works great for scripts/Makefiles I only want locally and collaborators wouldn’t care about or be able to use.

digikata

18 minutes ago

For quite a while, I've have had a shell fcn that will take all the untracked files listed in a git status, and push them to .git/info/exclude. Generally applied after an add+commit of everything I do want to go generally into the repo.

RSHEPP

2 hours ago

Interested in examples of the types of scripts others collaborators wouldn't be able to use? Like scripts for PR workflows?

junon

2 hours ago

Usually when I'm working in one part of the codebase and I have sample data or something at a specific path on my local machine and Im testing the same thing over and over again will I make a Makefile or something and info/exclude it to help me keep focused. That's one way I use it.

Hendrikto

2 hours ago

This is just a very low-effort regurgitation of this: https://git-scm.com/docs/gitignore

axus

25 minutes ago

Submit that link to Hacker News, and see how far it gets!

jagged-chisel

2 hours ago

Hey, come on now - they added 'check-ignore' which is good complementary advice.

_the_inflator

2 hours ago

You made my day. Everything is said and explained there.

Ok, sometimes a more vivid and visually explanatory style would help, but here still Google is your friend for individual concepts.

One of the best resources there is. git is a hell of a tool. It looks simple but is so beautifully versatile without being complex or not deductive.

y2244

2 hours ago

"Google is your friend for individual concepts."

Asking aLlm is the new google

b40d-48b2-979e

2 hours ago

    git is a hell of a tool. It looks simple but is so beautifully versatile without being complex

    without being complex
Uh, what?

rafram

2 hours ago

What part of

   Enumerating objects: 15, done.
   Counting objects: 100% (15/15), done.
   Delta compression using up to 10 threads
   Compressing objects: 100% (8/8), done.
   Writing objects: 100% (8/8), 1.43 KiB | 1.43 MiB/s, done.
   Total 8 (delta 7), reused 0 (delta 0), pack-reused 0 (from 0)
   remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (7/7), completed with 7 local objects.
don't you understand?!

onraglanroad

41 minutes ago

Well, since I know what a delta is, and I know what an object is, I understand all of it.

judofyr

2 hours ago

Not sure where I picked up this, but I’ve added this to my global Git ignore:

    attic
That way you can just create an attic directory in any project where you can keep random stuff that should never be committed. I’ve yet to find a repo which actually has such a directory checker in.

williamjackson

2 hours ago

I do this too! But I call it `.local`

zahlman

10 minutes ago

I have a new-repository script that creates a .local directory and puts a .gitignore with just `*` in it.

jeremyscanvic

an hour ago

I knew about .git/info/exclude and ~/.config/git/ignore but not about git-check-ignore(1). Neat!

uptown

15 minutes ago

Not really news. I worked with dozens of developers who have managed to ignore files in Git.

barbazoo

an hour ago

Exclude sounds like a recipe for sadness.

globular-toast

29 minutes ago

Magit has good support for these other methods. You press <i> and then select if you want the ignore to be shared (.gitignore) or private (.git/info/exclude).

bitvvip

an hour ago

I still like using gitignore very much