[CLOSED] Show hidden ".htaccess" files

[core-ai-bot]

Issue by TuckerWhitehouse
Saturday Jun 23, 2012 at 15:22 GMT
Originally opened as adobe/brackets#1133

---

Issue #98 addressed hidden files being shown, and as a result, filtered all files, excluding any that began with ".", making it very difficult to edit an .htaccess file.

---

TuckerWhitehouse included the following code: https://github.com/adobe/brackets/pull/1133/commits

[core-ai-bot]

Comment by njx
Sunday Jun 24, 2012 at 00:07 GMT

---

Hi Tucker--good point! I think we're primarily hiding dot files to avoid including things like the ".git" folder in a repo, but it makes sense that you should be able to edit ordinary dot files. I suspect we'll want to generalize this beyond .htaccess specifically, though. We might want to have the notion of an exclusion list for the file tree, and add SCC folders like .svn/ and .git/ to the list by default.

[core-ai-bot]

Comment by EinLama
Tuesday Jun 26, 2012 at 10:28 GMT

---

@njx Sounds like a good idea.

[core-ai-bot]

Comment by robbl
Tuesday Jun 26, 2012 at 12:53 GMT

---

I always feel most comfortable with a combination of exclusion and inclusion, though it has to be clear which is stronger. You might would stick with "in order of definition" in that case.

[core-ai-bot]

Comment by TuckerWhitehouse
Tuesday Jun 26, 2012 at 22:00 GMT

---

If the original premise was to hide things such as the default .DS_Store and Thumbs.db in addition to the generic .git and .svn folders, couldn't these be added to a specific exclusion list, and then show all other hidden files?

For example,

function _shouldShowInTree(entry) {
    return [".git", ".svn", ".DS_Store", "Thumbs.db"].indexOf(entry.name) === -1;
}

[core-ai-bot]

Comment by njx
Tuesday Jun 26, 2012 at 22:57 GMT

---

Yup, I think we might want to start there.

[core-ai-bot]

Comment by TuckerWhitehouse
Tuesday Jun 26, 2012 at 23:20 GMT

---

Is there anything else that needs to be added to that initial block list? And should I submit a new pull request with that change reflected?

[core-ai-bot]

Comment by peterflynn
Wednesday Jun 27, 2012 at 00:14 GMT

---

That seems like a good set to me. (CVS doesn't have any dotfiles, does it?)

Submitting a new pull request would be a little cleaner in terms of numbers of commits, but it also seems ok to just push up a new change to this existing request since it's pretty small.