3 ms·

The argument that it just moves the clutter to another directory still applies.

bawolff 3y ago
I 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 ago
  It's a bit like cleaning your room by shoving everything into the closet.
  - hughesjj 3y ago
    So, still better than no tidying?
  - ysavir 3y ago
    By 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 ago
    Or cleaning your room by hanging things up in the closet?
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    That's literally the point of having a closet.
  - adammarples 3y ago
    It's more like cleaning your desk by putting related files into a folder.
  - marssaxman 3y ago
    The 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 ago
But 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.

I 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 ago
It's a bit like cleaning your room by shoving everything into the closet.
- hughesjj 3y ago
  So, still better than no tidying?
- ysavir 3y ago
  By 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 ago
  Or cleaning your room by hanging things up in the closet?
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  That's literally the point of having a closet.
- adammarples 3y ago
  It's more like cleaning your desk by putting related files into a folder.
- marssaxman 3y ago
  The 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 ago

But 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.