You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This might just be a matter of me having trouble with the appropriate syntax to
accomplish what I'd like, but ultimately, I'd like to be able to say "ignore
all files *except* .xyz".
For instance, if I wanted to only import video files or image files from.
The only solution I was able to find about doing this in svn (as you mentioned
it uses similar syntax) was here: http://www.thoughtspark.org/node/38
The syntax seemed rather clunky. Is there any chance you could perhaps
implement a "+/-" syntax for inclusion / exclusion of a file mask. The idea
being someone could type:
-*
+*.xyz
The masks get in sequential order, so first you "exclude" everything and then
you "include" files ending in ".xyz". This is just an example of a way the
inclusion/exclusion filter might work (this is how HTTRACK implements file
masks, but again, it's just one possible way to implement it).
Thanks
Original issue reported on code.google.com by in...@vittorio.me on 23 Jun 2011 at 2:53
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Agreed. Possibly, this is even more useful for boar than an ignore list. I'd
expect most users to really just want to store *.jpg or *.raw in a session, and
ignore all other files. Luckily, this feature is easy to implement now that the
ignore basics are in place.
I think the most intuitive way to implement this would be to have an additional
session property named "include". And if it is set, boar will ignore all other
types of files. If both "include" and "ignore" is set, then "ignore" will have
priority. That is, you include "*.jpg" but you ignore "tmp/*", it behaves as
you would expect. Intuitively it feels like that system would fit most users.
Any thoughts about this before I implement it?
Original comment by ekb...@gmail.com on 26 Jun 2011 at 2:33
Sounds good to me. And yes, as you do, I expect in most cases people want to
process only a certain type(s) of files to the exclusion of all else (just
images, just videos, etc). That said, keeping the ignore parameter for things
such as tmp files and the like is important as well, so in other words, your
implementation seems just fine.
Original comment by in...@vittorio.me on 28 Jun 2011 at 2:23
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
in...@vittorio.me
on 23 Jun 2011 at 2:53The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: