On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 01:01:39PM -0500, Leo Razoumov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 07:53, Richard Hipp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > (4) Scripts are only exchanged between repositories on a "fossil clone" or > > "fossil configuration pull/sync". For the latter, detailed warnings about > > changes to scripts and recommendations to redo audits might be in order. > > > > IMHO "fossil clone" should *NOT* transfer scripts. Cloning is such a > common operation that I do it all the time on a whim without much > thoughts. Can easily do things that I will regret later.
In the case where we want "versioned" hook script. Mean, calling script that is inside the repository. A clone/pull will update it, but the setting that make it enable or not would be in the configuration part. And That's why one of the Richard point was that if a script get modified during a pull, the hook would be disable systematically and the user would have to audit the script and decide if he want to enable it back or not. > > On the other hand, somethings like "fossil configuration pull scripts > ..." requires just enough extra typing to make it a conscious effort. > Also, it would be great to have a "-n" or "--nochange" dry-run option > to tell a user whether there are any scripts to pull or push. > -- Martin G. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
