Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> In the "central repo model" you have another issue - you have potentially
> parallell pushes to different branches with no locking what-so-ever (and
> that's definitely _supposed_ to work), and I have this suspicion that the 
> "update for dumb servers" code isn't really safe in that setting anyway. I 
> haven't checked.

You are absolutely right.  It should grab some sort of lock
while it does its thing (would fcntl(F_GETLK) be acceptable to
networked filesystem folks?).

I have one question regarding the hooks.  We seem to prefer
avoiding system and roll our own.  Is there a particular reason,
other than bypassing the need to quote parameters for shell?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to