4 ms·
The name doesn't make sense, those aren't metadata files, they're configuration or application. I guess I'm also not seeing what the exact problem is. The proj
by politelemon 3y ago
The name doesn't make sense, those aren't metadata files, they're configuration or application.
I guess I'm also not seeing what the exact problem is. The project root is crowded, yes, now this suggests making a different directory crowded. The messiness is shifted.
- KMnO4 3y agoLet’s not bikeshed this. The most common use of the meta prefix means “about (this category)”, eg metadata, but that’s not its only form. The original Greek prefix is a preposition that means “with”, “among”, or “beside”. Doesn’t seem like a stretch that config files are a type of metafile.
- benatkin 3y ago#18 applies I think. I don't see a reason to think GP is just wanting to bikeshed just for the sake of bikeshedding. https://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/engl1311/fallacies.htm https://utminers.utep.edu/omwilliamson/engl1311/fallacies.ht...
- bawolff 3y agoI also had the same reaction. It just doesn't seem very descriptive. Even .config would be better
- benatkin 3y agoThe argument that it just moves the clutter to another directory still applies.
- bawolff 3y agoI don't understand how that is an argument. Of course organizing things involves moving them to other places. That is basically the definition of organizing something.
- benatkin 3y agoIt's a bit like cleaning your room by shoving everything into the closet.
- hughesjj 3y agoSo, still better than no tidying?
- ysavir 3y agoBy that logic, why put any files in directories? Let's keep the entire project at the root level. The truth is, it's not that the current project roots are a mess. It's that there's a complete and holistic category of file that is being kept in the root of projects, and putting them in a directory dedicated to that category is utterly sensible. Every other category is kept in a dedicated namespace in the file structure, why should config files be the exception?
- bawolff 3y agoOr cleaning your room by hanging things up in the closet?
- TeMPOraL 3y agoThat's literally the point of having a closet.
- adammarples 3y agoIt's more like cleaning your desk by putting related files into a folder.
- marssaxman 3y agoThe purpose of the closet is to store your things. If your closet is a mess, that's a problem, but it's a better problem than the one you had before.
- afavour 3y agoBut that’s still better than not moving the clutter at all. A root directory with important files + clutter is worse then a root directly with only important files and a separate directory with clutter. I agree with the GP about bikeshedding. A debate about this would never end.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- benatkin 3y ago> A debate about this would never end. Which is why the whole thing needs to be nipped in the bud. For one thing .meta would already be a dotfile so .dotfile/.env would be redundant. But that's called dotenv! What's it going to be named now? Or maybe that wouldn't be included. But it's on the list in the tweet linked to in the article.
- throwaway290 3y ago> Let's not bikeshed this Tell this to the guy who started it by suggesting files should be moved in the first place. Right now any codebase can put them wherever it wants. If you suggest to standardize things you damn better get the whole idea including naming right.
- sph 3y agoIt's a suggestion, not a mandate. Don't adopt it if you don't like it. Geez
- throwaway290 3y agoIf it's a suggestion then why do you care if people suggest something else in return?
- Waterluvian 3y agoThis entire thing already feels like a bike shedding exercise. I agree it’s kind of uncomfortable. But I’ve had no real problems over the years of having these files in whatever directory they need to be in given the context they work for.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- bradgessler 3y agoTo throw my 2 cents into the hat: .project - Since these files typically "configure a project", a dot project directory could hold all of those files. .meta - Agree its not super descriptive, which is fine, but more precision could be good. .config - Problem with this is "configuration for what?", the project or the application?
- Macha 3y ago.project is out because of how it would interact with Eclipse and derived tools, which used the name first.
- paulddraper 3y ago.tools Or simply tools
- rizky05 3y ago[dead]
- cornel_io 3y agoA separate directory being crowded with things that serve a similar purpose is vastly superior to dumping crap in the project root, though... There's a reason Linux doesn't just stuff everything into /
- benatkin 3y agohttps://github.com/torvalds/linux https://github.com/torvalds/linux seems fine w/ the modules & config files sharing the top level folder. Sorting directories to the top helps.
- Drblessing 3y agoThe messiness is shifted but I don't have to see them in the top-level in VSCode. That's a big improvement.
- throwanem 3y agoWhy is it a problem to see them?
- Drblessing 3y agoPersonal preference. And clearly, from this thread, that's a common reason why.
- throwanem 3y agoThat sounds like a case for configurable masking at the editor level, rather than for a new standard of project arrangement in the filesystem.