list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <>
Cc: Git <>
Subject: Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 14:52:02 -0700
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFyIEFybmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Tue, 26 Apr 2016 12:58:04 +0200")

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <> writes:

> I think it's fair enough to say that if we had this facility this
> would be good enough:
>  * Your hooks are executed in glob() order, local .git first, then /etc/git/...
>  * If it's a hook like pre-commit that can reject something the first
> hook to fail short-circuits. I.e. none of the rest get executed.
>  * If it's not a hook like that e.g. post-commit all of the hooks will
> get executed.
>  * If you need anything more complex you can just wrap your hooks in
> your own shellscript.
> I.e. it takes care of the common case where:
>  * You just want to execute N hooks and don't want to write a wrapper.
>  * For pre-* hooks the common case is it doesn't matter /what/
> rejected things, just that it gets rejected, e.g. for pre-receive.
> Also if you care about performance you can order them in
> cheapest-first order.

Stop using the word "common" to describe what is not demonstratably

The above only covers a very limited subset of the use cases, which
is the two bullet points above (one of them i.e. "I do not bother to
write a wrapper" is not even a valid use case).  That may be a good
starting point, but it is so simple that can be done with a wrapper
with several lines at most.  So I am not sympathetic to that line of
reasoning at all.

I can buy "It is too cumbersome to require everybody to reinvent and
script the cascading logic, and the core side should help by giving
a standard interface that is flexible enough to suit people's need",

And I have to say that a sequential execution that always
short-circuits at the first failure is below that threshold.

One reason I care about allowing the users to specify "do not
shortcut" is that I anticipate that people would want to have a
logging of the result at the end of the chain.

      parent reply	other threads:[~2016-04-26 21:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-22 23:51 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2016-04-25 17:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-04-26 10:58   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2016-04-26 13:40     ` Marc Branchaud
2016-04-26 16:09       ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2016-04-26 17:52         ` Christian Couder
2016-04-26 21:09         ` Marc Branchaud
2016-04-26 21:52     ` Junio C Hamano [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link list mirror (unofficial, one of many)

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror
	git clone --mirror http://ou63pmih66umazou.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://czquwvybam4bgbro.onion/git
	git clone --mirror http://hjrcffqmbrq6wope.onion/git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V1 git git/ \
	public-inbox-index git

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroups are available over NNTP:
 note: .onion URLs require Tor:

code repositories for the project(s) associated with this inbox:

AGPL code for this site: git clone