On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Warren Young <w...@etr-usa.com> wrote:
> On Aug 30, 2015, at 2:27 AM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > it opens up many more potential failure cases > > I don’t see what’s difficult about failing a transaction if a hook is > defined and the external program call fails. All the difficult parts are > fobbed off on the person writing the hook script. > i make a commit locally. i push. The push fails because a remote hook disallows it. What then? How do we resolve my repo's discrepancy at that point? That becomes fossil's problem because people will (rightfully) want to retain the data they just committed. > > what happens to a commit if an http connection to an external server, > used by a trigger, cannot be established? > > The commit fails, same as if the process of attempting the commit causes > any other error, such as a fork without --allow-fork. > The _push_ fails. The commit has long-since happened locally. > > Many hosting environments do not allow hosted scripts/apps to establish > outbound connections with external servers > > If you’re on such a host, you don’t get to use hooks. Switch to a > different hosting provider if you need hooks. There are dozens of > bare-bones VPS and cloud hosting providers without this restriction. > Many commercial/enterprise environments don't allow this. We once, after 8 months of development using 'maven' as a build tool, had to port everything to ant after discovering that the remote site does not allow external internet access (in or out). -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal "Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
