3 ms·

How is this not a very, very, on-the-nose example of "sweeping the dust under the rug"

regularfry 3y ago
Because the most important part of the problem isn't the profusion of config files, it's that as a project owner I'm not in control of the most important entry point to my own work.
- benatkin 3y ago
  The alternative for a lot of things is the root directory having almost nothing in it, because the main content is already split from the top level directory by: - node monorepos by putting everything in the packages directory - python repos by putting almost everything underneath the name of the package What might help some who are annoyed by this perceived clutter is to be to jump straight into the main content in the subdirectory. Getting the other files moved out only helps it a little because you don't have to go through as many items to click or cd into the main content's directory. It doesn't remove a whole step. The steps are still 1) to go to the repo and 2) click or cd to the directory that has the main content.
powersnail 3y ago
More like putting utensils into a drawer, as far as I can see.
- Izkata 3y ago
  That's at least some sort of organization (which drawer?), this just hides the mess with no organization. If you're gonna propose tidying it up, at least propose a useful organization other than just hiding it, like from the example list of files maybe something like 3 subdirectories: installers, linters, and compilers/runners?
  - powersnail 3y ago
    Well, presumably the root directory of a code repo does contains drawers (directories) other than ".meta/", e.g. sources in "src/", headers in "include/", assets in "assets/", etc. I think the point of ".meta" is the drawer for config files of _tools_. And these tools, depending on the language and the ecosystem, might not fall into neat subdirectories like "installers", or "linters". Some compiler comes with their own packaging system, and some with their own linter. ".meta/{tool_name}.{ext}" or ".meta/{tool_name}/*.{ext}" should be sufficient in that regard. (Though I do prefer ".config" over ".meta")
  - marssaxman 3y ago
    In my closet there is a bin full of batteries. This bin has no internal organization; all different types of batteries are jumbled together. You could say that I have just hidden the mess, and that there is no point having a battery bin unless you are also going to have a sub-bin for each type of battery - but in practice, this is enough. When I need a battery, I know where to look for it, and there are no batteries cluttering up any other parts of my house.
111111IIIIIII 3y ago
[flagged]

Because the most important part of the problem isn't the profusion of config files, it's that as a project owner I'm not in control of the most important entry point to my own work.

benatkin 3y ago
The alternative for a lot of things is the root directory having almost nothing in it, because the main content is already split from the top level directory by: - node monorepos by putting everything in the packages directory - python repos by putting almost everything underneath the name of the package What might help some who are annoyed by this perceived clutter is to be to jump straight into the main content in the subdirectory. Getting the other files moved out only helps it a little because you don't have to go through as many items to click or cd into the main content's directory. It doesn't remove a whole step. The steps are still 1) to go to the repo and 2) click or cd to the directory that has the main content.

powersnail 3y ago

More like putting utensils into a drawer, as far as I can see.

Izkata 3y ago
That's at least some sort of organization (which drawer?), this just hides the mess with no organization. If you're gonna propose tidying it up, at least propose a useful organization other than just hiding it, like from the example list of files maybe something like 3 subdirectories: installers, linters, and compilers/runners?
- powersnail 3y ago
  Well, presumably the root directory of a code repo does contains drawers (directories) other than ".meta/", e.g. sources in "src/", headers in "include/", assets in "assets/", etc. I think the point of ".meta" is the drawer for config files of _tools_. And these tools, depending on the language and the ecosystem, might not fall into neat subdirectories like "installers", or "linters". Some compiler comes with their own packaging system, and some with their own linter. ".meta/{tool_name}.{ext}" or ".meta/{tool_name}/*.{ext}" should be sufficient in that regard. (Though I do prefer ".config" over ".meta")
- marssaxman 3y ago
  In my closet there is a bin full of batteries. This bin has no internal organization; all different types of batteries are jumbled together. You could say that I have just hidden the mess, and that there is no point having a battery bin unless you are also going to have a sub-bin for each type of battery - but in practice, this is enough. When I need a battery, I know where to look for it, and there are no batteries cluttering up any other parts of my house.

111111IIIIIII 3y ago

[flagged]