From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90E461F4B4 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 00:03:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232939AbhDIADb (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Apr 2021 20:03:31 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:64913 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232426AbhDIADb (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Apr 2021 20:03:31 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30D2EC6253; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 20:03:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=7BRP4x3SQaT2oaf5lozHJ7xluzA=; b=fmKNPM G0dkijSTHTMCZXfw9KLkbxsBuGkbgql1Z5hEgNLty4DXpqPCmF/xT2WN2C1jffYH 9FtXXbPjnXlu2hl0MRf+b7sIKZFaWuiijv2zd2PK3OCKpB5IuJXsXQleNQHuPjYe ir4lgu9FxURevuzYVL6AlVE2CFOmsm+5OLkpk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Yw2KAwCc1FCwERy/nFV6T52sdUF29O7y iOPOD3Gy3xb+Y8mG7cPT42dR/v3NhKbah3+v//GuoYhs0gBIt9JgRNf/oNRPoWb0 v6fMmofqzlxiLUPxdNHHsWSOcrfzWXh6nX/Qmk/KUZSjF4DHh/3qwYKmV8BvvG/p xL2v3iQtwfc= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26CABC6252; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 20:03:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.243.138.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AECBEC6251; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 20:03:18 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Emily Shaffer Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jeff Hostetler Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 37/37] docs: unify githooks and git-hook manpages References: <20210311021037.3001235-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20210311021037.3001235-38-emilyshaffer@google.com> Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 17:03:18 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Emily Shaffer's message of "Thu, 8 Apr 2021 16:46:12 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: FD67AA62-98C6-11EB-9257-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Emily Shaffer writes: > I got bitten by this same issue with native-hooks.txt while addressing > comments, too. Another commenter suggested to not inline those hook > definitions into "git help hook" - so I plan to drop that part of this > patch. If it makes it easier for you, I think you could revert this last > commit; if we decide later that we want to have "git help hook" share > the hook definitions after all, I think we should do that separately and > as a quick change not stuck behind 36 other complicated patches. I've already discarded the step, and then I had to eject the whole topic from 'seen' for now (see my other message to you earlier today). The "other complicated patches" need to be whipped into shape to be at least in 'next' first; I do not know how close the last round is from that state. Thanks.