Compare each .gitignore found with an appropiate relative path #3338

aaossa · 2022-10-17T19:46:16Z

Description

Fix #3315 : Fix incorrectly applied .gitignore rules by considering the .gitignore location and the relative path to the target file. Commit message of the commit that fixed the bug:

When a .gitignore file contains the special rule to ignore every subfolder content (*/*) and the file is located in a subfolder
relative to where the command is executed (root), the rule is incorrectly applied and ignores every file at the same level of the .gitignore file.

The reason for this is that the gitignore variable accumulates the rules found in each .gitignore while traversing files and directories recursively. This makes sense and, in general, works as expected. The problem is that the gitignore rules are applied using as the root of the target directory as a reference. This is the cause of the bug.

The implemented solution keeps track of every .gitignore file found while traversing the targets and the location of each .gitignore. Then, when matching files to the .gitignore rules, compare each set of rules with the appropiate relative path to the candidate target file.

To make this possible, we changed the single gitignore object with a dictionary of similar objects, where the corresponding key is the path to the folder that contains that .gitignore file. This required changing the signature of the get_sources function. Also, we introduce a is_ignored function that compares a file with every set of rules. Finally, some tests required an update to pass the gitignore object in the new format.

Checklist - did you ...

Add an entry in CHANGES.md if necessary?
Add / update tests if necessary?
~~Add new / update outdated documentation?~~

github-actions · 2022-10-17T20:20:03Z

diff-shades reports zero changes comparing this PR (c09a816) to main (0e9d29a).

What is this? | Workflow run | diff-shades documentation

src/black/files.py

aaossa · 2022-10-20T15:30:56Z

Converting to draft because I'm getting strange results locally

src/black/files.py

tests/test_black.py

aaossa · 2022-10-20T17:53:47Z

This is PR is back up again and ready for review 👍

JelleZijlstra · 2022-10-26T01:14:20Z

src/black/__init__.py

@@ -660,14 +662,14 @@ def get_sources(
        elif p.is_dir():
            if exclude is None:
                exclude = re_compile_maybe_verbose(DEFAULT_EXCLUDES)
-                gitignore = get_gitignore(root)
+                root_gitignore = get_gitignore(root)
                p_gitignore = get_gitignore(p)
                # No need to use p's gitignore if it is identical to root's gitignore
                # (i.e. root and p point to the same directory).


What if there are more than two levels? For example, we're formatting a/b/c/ and a/.gitignore/, a/b/.gitignore, and a/b/c/.gitignore all exist.

Good question. Right now, if the command is black a/b/c/ then a/b/.gitignore is completely skipped while a/.gitignore and a/b/c/.gitignore are captured by root_gitignore and p_gitignore, respectively. What's the expected behavior?

Should this be a separate issue/PR? If its an undefined behavior, then it should be documented properly I think

What if there are more than two levels? For example, we're formatting a/b/c/ and a/.gitignore/, a/b/.gitignore, and a/b/c/.gitignore all exist.

The current behavior seems to be that black a/b/c only detects a/b/c/.gitignore and completely ignores other gitignore files. This PR implements the same behavior

src/black/files.py

JelleZijlstra · 2022-10-26T01:15:43Z

src/black/files.py

@@ -198,7 +198,7 @@ def gen_python_files(
    extend_exclude: Optional[Pattern[str]],
    force_exclude: Optional[Pattern[str]],
    report: Report,
-    gitignore: Optional[PathSpec],
+    gitignore: Optional[Dict[Path, PathSpec]],


Would suggest renaming this to gitignore_dict for clarity. Also, no reason to keep this Optional, we can just use an empty dict if there's no gitignores.

gitignore can be None if exclude is not None. In that case, no gitignore is considered at any level. I though that this is the expected behavior while reading the code. If get_sources receives a value for exclude, what's the expected behavior?

About renaming the variable: I agree 👍

src/black/files.py

When a .gitignore file contains the special rule to ignore every subfolder content (`*/*`) and the file is located in a subfolder relative to where the command is executed (root), the rule is incorrectly applied and ignores every file at the same level of the .gitignore file. The reason for this is that the `gitignore` variable accumulates the rules found in each .gitignore while traversing files and directories recursively. This makes sense and, in general, works as expected. The problem is that the gitignore rules are applied using as the relative path from root to target directory as a reference. This is the cause of the bug. The implemented solution keeps track of every .gitignore file found while traversing the targets and the absolute location of each .gitignore file. Then, when matching files to the .gitignore rules, compare each set of rules with the appropiate relative path to the candidate target file. To make this possible, we changed the single `gitignore` object with a dictionary of similar objects, where the corresponding key is the absolute path to the folder that contains that .gitignore file. This required changing the signature of the `get_sources` function. Also, we introduce a `is_ignored` function that compares a file with every set of rules. Finally, some tests required an update to pass the gitignore object in the new format. Signed-off-by: Antonio Ossa Guerra <aaossa@uc.cl>

The test contains three cases: 1) when the .gitignore with the special rule to ignore every subfolder and its contents (*/*) is in the root, 2) when the file is inside a subfolder relative to root (nested), and 3) when the target folder contains the .gitignore and root is a parent folder of the target. In all of these cases, we compare the files that are visible by Black with a known list of paths containing the expected values. Before the fix introduced in the previous commit, these tests failed when the .gitignore file was nested (second case). Now, the test is passed for all cases. Signed-off-by: Antonio Ossa Guerra <aaossa@uc.cl>

Add entry about fixed bug and changes introduced: ignore files by considering the location of each .gitignore file and the relative path of each target Signed-off-by: Antonio Ossa Guerra <aaossa@uc.cl>

src/black/__init__.py

aaossa · 2022-11-07T04:07:32Z

src/black/files.py

+            if relative_path is None:
+                break
+            if _gitignore is not None and _gitignore.match_file(relative_path):
+                report.path_ignored(child, "matches the .gitignore file content")


Maybe include the (full) path to the .gitignore file that matched?

These changes are small improvements to improve code readability: rename a variable to a more descriptive name (from `exclude_is_None` to `using_default_exclude`), use a better syntax to include the type annotation for `gitignore` variable (from typing comment to Python-style typing annotation), and replace an if-else block with a single dictionary definition (in this case, we need to compare keys instead of values, meaning that the change works) Signed-off-by: Antonio Ossa Guerra <aaossa@uc.cl>

The function to match a given path with every discovered .gitignore file does not need to be a nested function and can be a top-level function. The arguments did not change, but the naming of local variables was improved for readability. Signed-off-by: Antonio Ossa Guerra <aaossa@uc.cl>

aaossa force-pushed the issue-3315 branch 2 times, most recently from 10dc09c to e4bae08 Compare October 17, 2022 19:54

ichard26 self-requested a review October 18, 2022 01:18

aaossa commented Oct 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

src/black/files.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

aaossa marked this pull request as draft October 20, 2022 15:30

aaossa commented Oct 20, 2022

View reviewed changes

src/black/files.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

aaossa commented Oct 20, 2022

View reviewed changes

tests/test_black.py Show resolved Hide resolved

aaossa force-pushed the issue-3315 branch from e4bae08 to 50d45b0 Compare October 20, 2022 16:53

aaossa marked this pull request as ready for review October 20, 2022 16:56

ichard26 mentioned this pull request Oct 25, 2022

Remove whitespaces of whitespace-only files #3348

Merged

3 tasks

JelleZijlstra reviewed Oct 26, 2022

View reviewed changes

aaossa marked this pull request as draft November 2, 2022 03:05

aaossa force-pushed the issue-3315 branch 2 times, most recently from 50661f4 to f97cccd Compare November 2, 2022 19:41

aaossa added 3 commits November 2, 2022 16:42

Update CHANGES.md

f97cccd

Add entry about fixed bug and changes introduced: ignore files by considering the location of each .gitignore file and the relative path of each target Signed-off-by: Antonio Ossa Guerra <aaossa@uc.cl>

aaossa marked this pull request as ready for review November 2, 2022 20:02

aaossa requested review from JelleZijlstra and removed request for ichard26 November 2, 2022 20:04

aaossa commented Nov 3, 2022

View reviewed changes

src/black/__init__.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

aaossa marked this pull request as draft November 5, 2022 12:41

aaossa mentioned this pull request Nov 6, 2022

Apply .gitignore correctly in every source entry #3336

Merged

3 tasks

Merge branch 'main' into issue-3315

320f582

aaossa commented Nov 7, 2022

View reviewed changes

aaossa force-pushed the issue-3315 branch from f12b6d1 to 5aee3b7 Compare November 7, 2022 17:40

aaossa marked this pull request as ready for review November 7, 2022 17:57

aaossa force-pushed the issue-3315 branch 2 times, most recently from f257725 to c09a816 Compare November 8, 2022 13:12

JelleZijlstra approved these changes Nov 8, 2022

View reviewed changes

JelleZijlstra merged commit ffaaf48 into psf:main Nov 8, 2022

aaossa deleted the issue-3315 branch November 8, 2022 15:53

mosfet80 mentioned this pull request May 8, 2023

Update .pre-commit-config.yaml FreeCAD/FreeCAD#9502

Merged

1 task

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Compare each .gitignore found with an appropiate relative path #3338

Compare each .gitignore found with an appropiate relative path #3338

aaossa commented Oct 17, 2022 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 17, 2022 •

edited

Loading

aaossa commented Oct 20, 2022

aaossa commented Oct 20, 2022

JelleZijlstra Oct 26, 2022

aaossa Oct 26, 2022

aaossa Nov 2, 2022

aaossa Nov 7, 2022

JelleZijlstra Oct 26, 2022

aaossa Oct 26, 2022 •

edited

Loading

aaossa Nov 7, 2022

Compare each .gitignore found with an appropiate relative path #3338

Compare each .gitignore found with an appropiate relative path #3338

Conversation

aaossa commented Oct 17, 2022 • edited Loading

Description

Checklist - did you ...

github-actions bot commented Oct 17, 2022 • edited Loading

aaossa commented Oct 20, 2022

aaossa commented Oct 20, 2022

JelleZijlstra Oct 26, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aaossa Oct 26, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aaossa Nov 2, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aaossa Nov 7, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

JelleZijlstra Oct 26, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aaossa Oct 26, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aaossa Nov 7, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

aaossa commented Oct 17, 2022 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Oct 17, 2022 •

edited

Loading

aaossa Oct 26, 2022 •

edited

Loading