Skip to content

Update .gitignore generated by 'mix new' #13871

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 30, 2024

Conversation

frerich
Copy link
Contributor

@frerich frerich commented Sep 30, 2024

The .gitignore file would reference '/.fetch' files, which caused some confusion (cf.
https://elixir-lang.slack.com/archives/C03EPRA3B/p1727706411018609).

Some research suggests that these files are no longer generated as of commit 59b6e2e so let's stop mentioning them in the .gitignore, too.

The .gitignore file would reference '/.fetch' files, which caused some
confusion (cf.
https://elixir-lang.slack.com/archives/C03EPRA3B/p1727706411018609).

Some research suggests that these files are no longer generated as of
commit 59b6e2e so let's stop mentioning
them in the .gitignore, too.
@josevalim josevalim merged commit a2012c2 into elixir-lang:main Sep 30, 2024
@josevalim
Copy link
Member

💚 💙 💜 💛 ❤️

@frerich frerich deleted the drop-obsolete-gitignore branch September 30, 2024 15:04
@sabiwara
Copy link
Contributor

Shouldn't this be kept around a bit more, for projects that are created today on the latest version, but are meant to be supporting multiple versions?
This pattern might not be so rare for library authors.
Perhaps we could replace the comment by a TODO instead?

@josevalim
Copy link
Member

The projects created with Elixir 1.18 will have a requirement on Elixir ~> 1.18 anyway, so I think we are good. If someone wants to both downgrade the Elixir version AND change it via a dep, then they can add it back, although I think it may be quite rare. :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants