Re: Change in .gitignore handling: intended or bug?

> In any case, back to "on topic" part again; I couldn't come up with
> a better rewrite using named rules (partly because you need to
> clearly define each rule before referring them, and some of the
> rules are temporary workarounds for the 2.8 regression that will
> hopefully disappear in near future).  I think you understand the bug
> and the limitation of the current code a lot better than I do, so if
> you can please send a final version of the documentation update in
> the coming 18 hours (I have an option of using what is already
> queued on 'pu' as a fall-back-good-enough version but I want to keep
> the last-resort option as that--if I know a potential source of a
> better version, I'd choose to ask first ;-).