[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks
From: |
Harald Meland |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:20:37 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
[Matthieu Moy]
> Thomas Lord <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I can't imagine not wanting to re-run tree-lint after a tree-modifying
>> hook ran. What's wrong with (in essense):
>>
>>
>> #!/bin/sh
>>
>> tla tree-lint
>> run-hook
>> tla commit
>
> This will work when you call it, off course, but this seems to me to
> be a dangerous solution if the correctness of your archive really
> depends on "run-hook":
>
> 1) It is easy to forget about the wrapper script, and run "tla commit"
> by mistake.
If "the correctness of your archive" can be determined from a hook,
use tla's precommit hook to abort non-wrapped commits.
> 2) front-ends to xtla won't be aware of the the wrapper script, and
> will run "tla commit" anyway.
These will then also be aborted by tla's precommit hook.
> For someone using, say, sometimes xtla and sometimes fai, this
> requires a painfull customization.
Sure. I think this is a natural consequence of using multiple
non-cooperating tools: keeping customization consistent will be more
painful.
> (currently, xtla has no precommit hook, so, the user will have to
> write some elisp to achieve that)
... or override tla-tla-executable to point to their wrapper script.
> So, your solution works, but I think this is much simpler and safer
> for the user to have a pre-precommit hook.
I think that increasing the number of hooks in tla (for no other
reason than perceived convenience) will make it *harder* to learn, and
hence not at all "simpler". And, as the current precommit hook can be
used to abort non-conforming commits, I'm unconvinced of the "safer"
part as well.
> By the way, is there a particular reason why there's a post-commit
> hook ?
At least automatic near-instant updating of mirrors and post-commit
email notifications comes to mind.
--
Harald
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] missing feature: text file handling, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] missing feature: text file handling, Robert Collins, 2004/10/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] missing feature: text file handling, Erik de Castro Lopo, 2004/10/09
- [Gnu-arch-users] Having two precommit hooks, Mikhael Goikhman, 2004/10/09
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Having two precommit hooks, Thomas Lord, 2004/10/09
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Anand Kumria, 2004/10/10
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Sean Case, 2004/10/10
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Anand Kumria, 2004/10/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Stig Brautaset, 2004/10/10
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Thomas Lord, 2004/10/10
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Matthieu Moy, 2004/10/11
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks,
Harald Meland <=
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Matthieu Moy, 2004/10/11
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Robert Collins, 2004/10/12
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Thomas Lord, 2004/10/11
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Harald Meland, 2004/10/11
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Thomas Lord, 2004/10/12
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, Thomas Lord, 2004/10/11
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Having two precommit hooks, James Blackwell, 2004/10/12
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Having two precommit hooks, Anand Kumria, 2004/10/11
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Having two precommit hooks, Thomas Lord, 2004/10/11
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Having two precommit hooks, Mikhael Goikhman, 2004/10/11