Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes:

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes:
>> > ... there are _already_ hooks without pre/post.
>> Like commit-msg?  Yes, it would have been nicer if it were named
>> verify-commit-message or something.
> No it wouldn't. I can use the commit-msg hook to change the commit message and
> to absolutely no verification, so verify-commit-message would be misleading.

You are confused (and please do not spread the confusion).  If you
read the first paragraph of the documentation on the hook and think
for 5 seconds why "--no-verify" countermands it, you would realize
that the hook is primarily meant for verification.  We also allow
the hook to edit the message, but that is not even "a useful feature
added as an afterthought"; the documentation mentions it because the
implementation did not bother to make sure the hook did not touch
the message file.

It was a mistake not to call it with a clear name that tells
verification happens there.

>> Old mistakes are harder to change because of inertia.  It is not a
>> good excuse to knowingly make a new mistake to add new exceptions
>> that the users need to check documentations for, is it?

I see no reason to waste more time on this point.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to