On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:48 PM, David Roundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 01:42:39PM -0700, Jason Dagit wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Nathan Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 01:09:55PM -0400, David Roundy wrote: > > > > Here's an amended refactor of my previous pre/post-hook change. I'm > > > > still hoping for comments from someone other than Jason. Not that I > > > > don't appreciate Jason's comments, but given that we disagree it > seems > > > > like a good idea to get more feedback from *someone*. > > > > > [snip] > > > > > I would recommend making run-posthook the default, or eliminating it. > > > > > > I would recommend keeping prompt-posthook as an option. > > > > This is similar what I was recommending, but in many fewer words. I'm > also > > advocating we keep the option for disabling the posthook. > > Let me reiterate that I never suggested removing that option, nor have > I posted code that would do so. If we're keeping prompt and disable then it seems fine. I glanced at the patches it I couldn't tell what the extent was. Jason
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
