Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023) • Hacker News Board

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#31

Post by dwattttt » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 3:38 AM UTC

akerl_ wrote: post #29

dwattttt wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This still confuses me. Do you mean to say "use the .gitignore functionality, and check in the .gitkeep file"?

No. Use a .gitignore instead of .gitkeep. Instead of checking in build/.gitkeep, check in build/.gitignore.

I don't know that I like this approach. It certainly works, but it's not specifically what (people expect) a .gitignore file to be used for. That confusion isn't good: https://thecodelesscode.com/case/222 and https://thecodelesscode.com/case/223

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#32

Post by juggerl6 » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 3:45 AM UTC

jkubicek wrote: post #22

selridge wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is delightful. Accidental load-bearing SO post.

It's especially funny since my answer is wrong anyway! The other top answer is much better. I did get a lot of early SO brownie points from that one answer though.

[dead]

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#33

Post by OptionOfT » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 3:48 AM UTC

For me, I put them in directories that have to be there, because the underlying code doesn't create the directory, and without it, it fails.

Another example is where you want an empty directory mounted in Docker. If the directory is not there it is created with root permissions and then I can't even look into it.

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#34

Post by beej71 » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:04 AM UTC

What am I missing about this use case? It seems like you should just create `build/.gitignore` with `*` in it and `add -f` it and be done.

I'd use `.gitkeep` (or an empty `.gitignore`) if I needed to commit an otherwise-empty hierarchy. But if I'm going to have a `.gitignore` in there anyway, it's not empty.

> The directory is now “tracked” with a single, standard file that will work even after renames.

Does `.gitkeep` not work after renames? Or `.gitignore`?

So I am missing something. :)

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#35

Post by CGamesPlay » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:07 AM UTC

macote wrote: post #7

The author is misusing .gitkeep. I use it to keep source code folders that don’t contain any code yet, but whose structure is already defined.

You can rename `.gitkeep` to `.gitignore` and both be happy in that case.

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#36

Post by smrq » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:18 AM UTC

Arrowmaster wrote: post #12

The author makes a very common mistake of not reading the very first line of the documentation for .gitignore. A gitignore file specifies intentionally untracked files that Git should ignore. Files already tracked by Git are not affected; see the NOTES below for details. You should never be putting "!.gitignore" in .gitignore. Just do `echo "*" > .gitignore; git add -f .gitignore`. Once a file is tracked any changes…

Why is this approach better than the author's?

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#37

Post by GreenDolphinSys » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:21 AM UTC

.gitkeep is intuitive and easy to understand. Unignoring a .gitignore is not intuitive. This falls squarely into "clever optimization tricks that obscure intent and readability". Don't do things like this.

It's not that hard to update a .gitignore file every now and then.

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#38

Post by cortesoft » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:35 AM UTC

andybak wrote: post #8

cortesoft wrote: post #4

Not sure why you can’t just have your build script create the build directory?

Because you might not have a build script?

Then how is anything ending up in the build directory?

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#39

Post by KPGv2 » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:46 AM UTC

beej71 wrote: post #34

What am I missing about this use case? It seems like you should just create `build/.gitignore` with `*` in it and `add -f` it and be done. I'd use `.gitkeep` (or an empty `.gitignore`) if I needed to commit an otherwise-empty hierarchy. But if I'm going to have a `.gitignore` in there anyway, it's not empty. > The directory is now “tracked” with a single, standard file that will work even after renames. Does `.gitkee…

That's a hack. What you should do is a .gitignore with * and then a whitelist of paths like src/**/*.

If you rely on `add -f` you will forget to commit something important.

For example, for a tree sitter grammar I developed a couple years ago, here is my .gitignore:

```

# Ignore everything

*

# Top-level whitelist

CHANGELOG.md

# Allow git to see inside subdirectories

!*/

# Whitelist the grammar and tests

!/grammar/*.js

!/test/corpus/*.txt

# Whitelist any grammar and tests in subdirectories

!/grammar/**/*.js

!/test/corpus/**/*.txt

```*

Re: Don't create .gitkeep files, use .gitignore instead (2023)

#40

Post by cyberrock » Sat, Feb 21, 2026, 4:53 AM UTC

File filtering is so delightfully broken everywhere. Everytime I revisit git, rsync, restic, borg, etc. something just goes wrong somewhere on this seemingly simple task, and SO and thus LLMs are filled to the brim with slightly wrong answers. We need a xkcd/927 because it can't possibly get any worse.