Thomas Sawyer wrote in post #1050299:
> Now, obviously not all of these will apply to every project. But I can
> imagine that given enough time and a rather thorough developer, a
> project could acquire configurations for a couple dozen tools. Think
> code
> coverage, code analysis, IDE/RAD configuration, etc. I suspect there is
> a
> saturation point --at some point it just becomes too much to remember.

Why remember?  Files are in the file system or VCS repository where you
can find them.  I am not sure I understand the issue you are having.

> Even
> so, it could amount to quite a few files, well exceeding the number of
> toplevel "meat" files of a project.

I don't see why this should be a problem.  Even more so: why are these
configuration files not "meat"?  That would mean you could have the
project without them and not lose anything.  I doubt that.  Reminds me
of people coming out of a meeting and saying "now off to some _real_
work" - that's just nonsense as communication is a large part of our
profession - as much as hacking.

> While there are obviously some files that will always remain (e.g.
> .git), I
> wonder if it is possible for a convention to ever develop to mitigate
> all
> this. Most likely that would be in the form of a common directory to
> hold
> all these files, although conceivably, it could be in the form of a
> couple
> of shared files --one for Ruby code and one for YAML.

That directory does exist already - as your posting proves: it's the
project's root directory. :-)

Kind regards

robert

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.