vcs.useIgnoreFile Git integration does not take .git/info/exclude into account

[jfly]

Environment information

CLI:
  Version:                      1.9.4
  Color support:                true

Platform:
  CPU Architecture:             x86_64
  OS:                           linux

Environment:
  BIOME_LOG_PATH:               unset
  BIOME_LOG_PREFIX_NAME:        unset
  BIOME_CONFIG_PATH:            unset
  NO_COLOR:                     unset
  TERM:                         "alacritty"
  JS_RUNTIME_VERSION:           "v22.11.0"
  JS_RUNTIME_NAME:              "node"
  NODE_PACKAGE_MANAGER:         unset

Biome Configuration:
  Status:                       Loaded successfully
  Formatter disabled:           false
  Linter disabled:              false
  Organize imports disabled:    false
  VCS disabled:                 false

Workspace:
  Open Documents:               0

What happened?

Do this in a git repo with biome installed:

1. Add a foo.js that has linting errors
2. Add /foo.js to your .git/info/exclude
3. Run biome: npx @biomejs/biome check . --vcs-enabled=true --vcs-client-kind=git. This will print out errors about foo.js

Expected result

It should ignore foo.js.

I'm guessing biome has implemented it's own logic for checking if a file is tracked by git, rather than asking git itself. This feels a lot like #1679, which was closed as "by design". (Feel free to close this as well, I just wanted to have a record of someone asking about it.)

Code of Conduct

• I agree to follow Biome's Code of Conduct

[ematipico]

Can you provide some documentation for .git/info/exclude? I didn't know it even existed

[arendjr]

I’m kinda inclined to say we may indeed want a more direct Git integration rather than parsing .gitignore (or .git/info/exclude) ourselves.

In #4817 someone also asked for commit linting, which would also require more direct Git integration, I bet. I know that’s not really a current priority, but I do agree it might be a nice thing to have at some point.

Plus it would relieve us of needing to support the custom glob format for Git. cc @Conaclos

[ematipico]

I’m kinda inclined to say we may indeed want a more direct Git integration rather than parsing .gitignore (or .git/info/exclude) ourselves.

While this is true, it's also a limitation. Time ago I fixed an issue where it was possible have a .gitignore file without having the .git folder. Apparently, this is a thing in some cases.

I'm not against enforcing checking the presence of .git folder (without a .git folder, git could error and not give us the ignored files), but it could be a breaking change.

[jfly]

Can you provide some documentation for .git/info/exclude? I didn't know it even existed

From https://git-scm.com/docs/gitignore:

Git normally checks gitignore patterns from multiple sources
[...]

• Patterns read from $GIT_DIR/info/exclude.

---

Time ago I fixed an issue where it was possible have a .gitignore file without having the .git folder.

Perhaps this is something that happens when dealing with source code archives (https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/working-with-files/using-files/downloading-source-code-archives)?

[ematipico]

Perhaps this is something that happens when dealing with source code archives

No, it was around some Docker project or something. I can't recall the details.