Add .comfyignore support to node packaging

[HenkDz]

Summary

• teach node packaging commands to read an optional .comfyignore
• ensure ignored files stay out of packed archives while required assets remain
• document workflow so teammates get consistent bundles

Testing

• pytest

[bigcat88]

Hello. Can you please fix the linter error and failing test?

[HenkDz]

Hello. Can you please fix the linter error and failing test?

Done

[HenkDz]

Used Properly, the .comfyignore should really benefit the community, node devs can publish lightweight nodes while keeping all the dev noise aside without having to .gitignore any dev files.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 71.79487% with 22 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
comfy_cli/file_utils.py	71.79%	22 Missing ⚠️

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #321      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   50.87%   52.00%   +1.12%     
==========================================
  Files          32       32              
  Lines        3444     3500      +56     
==========================================
+ Hits         1752     1820      +68     
+ Misses       1692     1680      -12     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
comfy_cli/command/custom_nodes/command.py	41.09% <ø> (ø)
comfy_cli/file_utils.py	78.26% <71.79%> (+23.02%)	⬆️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[HenkDz]

@bigcat88 should I update the README ?

[bigcat88]

There is no need to update the main readme yet; the information in README_DEV is sufficient for now.

---

Should we update text here?

@app.command(
    "pack",
    help="Pack the current node into a zip file. Ignorining .gitignore files.",
)
@tracking.track_command("pack")

---

Is it possible to move test to the tests folder? (I can do it myself later in a separate PR)

---

I looked at the code, and overall I agree that it's a useful thing, and I can say in advance that we're ready to accept this PR after some minor clarifications.

[HenkDz]

Thanks for the careful read, to answer your questions and inquiries I did the following:

• Updated the pack command help text so it now says “honoring .comfyignore patterns,” and cleaned up the typo.
• Relocated the new file-utils tests into the shared test suite as requested.
• The README note about forced files already matches the implementation: the packaging logic re-adds any paths listed in the include list even if they match .comfyignore, and the new test verifies that behavior.

Happy to expand or add more docs if you’d like!

[HenkDz]

Important to note:
Right now the pack command only “forces” files back into the archive if they’re listed in [tool.comfy.includes]. So if you add __init__.py to .comfyignore and don’t also list it under [includes], it gets skipped. The command doesn’t inject a default whitelist. That means the README line should be clarified (e.g., have folks add required files to [includes] or avoid ignoring them). If we want the CLI to always keep __init__.py (or other essentials), we’d need to add an explicit force-include list in code.

[bigcat88]

Thank you for the detailed answers and for making this PR so easy to review. Everything looks great, and we are ready to merge it, if you are agree.

We plan to hold this in the main branch for about a week before cutting a new release. This will give users who build from source a chance to test it and ensure everything is stable.

[HenkDz]

Most welcome, Sure go ahead and merge.
Really hope Node devs can see this as my custom_nodes folder is going out of hand eating the space, dev and production should be separate.