You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cordova.apache.org by Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org> on 2015/06/01 16:27:41 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving Rat Excludes closer to source
sgtm!
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Dmitry Blotsky <db...@microsoft.com>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Right now coho stores rat excludes inside its source code, which often
> goes out of date and we end up with a lot of noise in "coho
> audit-license-headers”. Do you think it would be a good idea to instead add
> a “.ratignore” file in each repo, much like .npmignore and .gitignore?
>
> Kindly,
> Dmitry
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving Rat Excludes closer to source
Posted by Jesse <pu...@gmail.com>.
+1
@purplecabbage
risingj.com
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Do it!
> On Jun 1, 2015 7:28 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > sgtm!
> >
> > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Dmitry Blotsky <db...@microsoft.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Right now coho stores rat excludes inside its source code, which often
> > > goes out of date and we end up with a lot of noise in "coho
> > > audit-license-headers". Do you think it would be a good idea to instead
> > add
> > > a ".ratignore" file in each repo, much like .npmignore and .gitignore?
> > >
> > > Kindly,
> > > Dmitry
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving Rat Excludes closer to source
Posted by Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>.
Do it!
On Jun 1, 2015 7:28 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:
> sgtm!
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Dmitry Blotsky <db...@microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Right now coho stores rat excludes inside its source code, which often
> > goes out of date and we end up with a lot of noise in "coho
> > audit-license-headers". Do you think it would be a good idea to instead
> add
> > a ".ratignore" file in each repo, much like .npmignore and .gitignore?
> >
> > Kindly,
> > Dmitry
>