Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Is there a way to ignore directories? #37

Closed
TheThirdOne opened this issue Apr 6, 2014 · 6 comments
Closed

Is there a way to ignore directories? #37

TheThirdOne opened this issue Apr 6, 2014 · 6 comments

Comments

@TheThirdOne
Copy link

If not that should be added; otherwise it should be documented.

@AaronO
Copy link

AaronO commented Apr 6, 2014

All files listed in either .gitignore or .ignore will be ignored.

We could also add .bookignore to that list. That would specifically be for GitBooks. What do you think ?

@TheThirdOne
Copy link
Author

I think .bookignore should be added simply to have a GitBook specific file, but I also think a command line option for ignoring certain files would be helpful if that isn't too hard to implement.

@AaronO
Copy link

AaronO commented Apr 6, 2014

I don't want to make the command line tool too cumbersome to use.

In my opinion a good convention is far superior to configuration.

I would rather have people use a .bookignore than remember that they have to add --ignore=folder1/,some_other_file etc ... (I also think that the later is uglier and more error prone, thus less desirable).

Do you have a strong and unique use case where a command line flag that would be better that a .bookignore file ?

@AaronO
Copy link

AaronO commented Apr 6, 2014

Basically all GitBooks should have the same build commands. With a good convention it's easier for new comers to pick up a new book, since they're already familiar with GtiBooks conventions and standards and don't need to learn the project's specific standards.

We need to do a good job at keeping and enforcing these conventions, because that's what makes GitBook "beautiful" and "elegant" ;)

P.S: I just wanted to help you understand where I'm coming from on this matter.

@TheThirdOne
Copy link
Author

I definitely see where you are coming from, and agree a .bookignore should be the preferred method for projects, but the dependency of a file shouldn't be a requirement. I don't see the point in restricting the command line interface for the purpose of simply maintaining good convention.

@AaronO
Copy link

AaronO commented Apr 6, 2014

The command line isn't restricted.

In this specific case, I believe that in most scenarios people would rather persist the ignore options than have to remember to include them at each build/serve/whatever ...

Not persisting those options, is also a bad practice. Because then collaborators can't contribute to your book without knowing the specific folders you ignore when running the gitbook command.

I can't think of a single compelling use case, where providing that info as a command line flag is superior (in terms of simplicity and general usefulness), that maintaining a .bookignore file.

Users are already used to .gitignore, .npmignore and others. So I think they would rather opt for the .bookignore option. And thus an --ignore flag would go underused on top of leaving the door open to bad practices.

I don't think we should add any features without a compelling use case behind them.

I'm sorry for being strict on this matter. But I really would like to avoid feature creep, and instead preserve strong conventions and best practices.

AaronO pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 6, 2014
@AaronO AaronO closed this as completed in c8f83e2 Apr 6, 2014
AaronO pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2014
AaronO pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2014
Nyar233 pushed a commit to Nyar233/gitbook that referenced this issue May 12, 2024
* Load all fonts

* Use font-content as CSS variable

* Fix weird performance.now issue

* Fix font definition
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants