RFR 8233844: Add LogCompilation build artifacts to .gitignore

[Jorn Vernee]

Hello Erik,

You are right, I spoke too soon. I deleted the artifacts and tried to 
trigger the creation by doing a clean build and running some tests, but 
neither seems to generate the artifacts. I'm really puzzled by this, 
since I have 4 repos that contain these artifacts (both git and hg), and 
I'm certain that I've never explicitly built this utility using maven 
(I've never used it. I can imagine building it once and not remembering, 
but not 4 times).

Any way, here is the updated webrev: 
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvernee/8233844/webrev.02

I'll keep an eye out for these artifacts appearing again.

Thanks,
Jorn

On 08/11/2019 15:16, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> Hello Jorn,
>
> On 2019-11-08 04:24, Jorn Vernee wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'd like to contribute this very small patch that adds some 
>> LogCompilation build artifacts to the .gitignore file.
>>
>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8233844
>> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jvernee/8233844/webrev.00/index.html
>>
>> Testing = manual
>>
>> FWIW, it seems that these artifacts are produced at some point either 
>> while doing a vanilla build, or when running the test, so these 
>> artifacts will show up pretty much always when using Git (AFAICS I 
>> have them in all my OpenJDK Git repos, and I've never directly used 
>> this utility). So, it seems worth it to gitnore them.
>>
> I've never seen these artifacts, and the only way I can see them being 
> created is if you explicitly invoke the maven build for LogCompilation 
> (which of course is a perfectly valid thing to do). The .classpath, 
> .project and .settings files are eclipse project files and it could be 
> argued that those should be put on ignore regardless of where in the 
> source tree they are found, just like we already do for .idea. When 
> adding this for .gitignore, I would prefer if we could keep parity 
> with .hgignore so please add it there too.
>
> /Erik
>
>> As a heads-up; I'm not a committer on the JDK project, so a sponsor 
>> would need to push this.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jorn
>>