Re: [PATCH] git-svn: add --ignore-paths option for fetching

> Vitaly "_Vi" Shukela wrote:
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Vitaly "_Vi" Shukela <public_vi@tut.by>
> 
> This would be a good place to explain why this is useful, and (if
> applicable) why you chose to implement it the way you did.
> 
> > --- a/Documentation/git-svn.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/git-svn.txt
> > @@ -96,6 +96,10 @@ COMMANDS
> >  	Store Git commit times in the local timezone instead of UTC.  This
> >  	makes 'git-log' (even without --date=local) show the same times
> >  	that `svn log` would in the local timezone.
> > +--ignore-paths=<regex>;;
> > +	This allows one to specify regular expression that will
> > +	cause skipping of all matching paths from checkout from SVN.
> > +	Example: --ignore-paths='^doc'
> >  
> >  This doesn't interfere with interoperating with the Subversion
> >  repository you cloned from, but if you wish for your local Git
> 
> You put the --ignore-paths explanation in the middle of the
> --localtime documentation (the last paragraph quoted still talks about
> --localtime).
> 
> > @@ -3245,6 +3246,15 @@ use warnings;
> >  use Carp qw/croak/;
> >  use File::Temp qw/tempfile/;
> >  use IO::File qw//;
> > +use vars qw/ $ignoreRegex/;
> > +
> > +# 0 -- don't ignore, 1 -- ignore
> > +sub isPathIgnored($) {
> > +    return 0 unless defined($ignoreRegex);
> > +    my $path = shift;
> > +    return 1 if $path =~ m!^$ignoreRegex!o;
> > +    return 0;
> > +}
> 
> This is the first function in git-svn.perl using camelCase.  Consider
> sticking to the current style and spelling it is_path_ignored().

> > @@ -3372,11 +3384,14 @@ sub add_file {
> >  	my ($self, $path, $pb, $cp_path, $cp_rev) = @_;
> >  	my $mode;
> >  
> > +	goto out if isPathIgnored($path);
> > +
> >  	if (!in_dot_git($path)) {
> >  		my ($dir, $file) = ($path =~ m#^(.*?)/?([^/]+)$#);
> >  		delete $self->{empty}->{$dir};
> >  		$mode = '100644';
> >  	}
> > +out:
> >  	{ path => $path, mode_a => $mode, mode_b => $mode,
> >  	  pool => SVN::Pool->new, action => 'A' };
> >  }
> 
> You broke the symmetry here, while all other hunks just add an
> equivalent check to the existing in_dot_git().
> 
> However, the latter makes me wonder if it would be cleaner to move the
> in_dot_git() test to isPathIgnored (er, is_path_ignored) too?