From ce64036407f1dbe3f944951ebe878ab59ca63050 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Rowan Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2026 16:05:04 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] CLAUDE.md: record that Cargo.lock is gitignored here on purpose My own board carried this as an inconsistency to settle -- "serialize.rs and reliable.rs commit one; netcode.rs does not" -- framed as if this repo were the outlier. It has it backwards. This .gitignore is hand-written and lists Cargo.lock beside the fuzz artifacts; the other two never mention it, so their locks are committed by OMISSION rather than by decision, and both are near-empty (1 and 2 packages) because those crates have essentially no dependencies. This is the only Rust port with real ones. I had already run cargo generate-lockfile here before checking, which is exactly the failure the hot blocks exist to stop, committed minutes after I finished writing them. The .gitignore is what caught me. Recording it where the next person will hit it first. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 --- CLAUDE.md | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) diff --git a/CLAUDE.md b/CLAUDE.md index a6682a9..f65d2ea 100644 --- a/CLAUDE.md +++ b/CLAUDE.md @@ -40,6 +40,17 @@ mint a new one — it is the wrong machine account. Either Glenn publishes from account, or he moves the token into the mas keychain with the prompting form (`security add-generic-password -U -a rowan -s crates-io-token -w`, no value after -w). Verified 2026-07-26: crates.io has netcode-official 1.0.0 while this repo is at 1.1.0. + +CARGO.LOCK IS GITIGNORED HERE ON PURPOSE +`.gitignore` lists `Cargo.lock` and `fuzz/Cargo.lock` deliberately, hand-written beside +the fuzz artifacts. This is a library crate: dependents do not use its lock, and this is +the only one of the three Rust ports with real dependencies (57 packages via +chacha20poly1305). serialize.rs and reliable.rs DO commit a lock, but by omission rather +than decision -- neither .gitignore mentions it, and both locks are near-empty (1 and 2 +packages) because those crates have essentially no dependencies. Do not "fix" the +inconsistency by adding a lock here; the considered choice is this one. +Note the lock IS packaged into the published .crate, so if this is ever revisited it is +a version site, not just a dev-convenience question. ## Build and test