li...@haller-berlin.de (Stefan Haller) writes: > When a rebase stops because of a conflict, and I edit the file to > resolve the conflict and say "git rebase --continue", then the > pre-commit hook doesn't run at that point,... > From glancing through the githooks manpage, I couldn't see any other > hook that would help in this situation. Am I missing something?
I do not think so. There may be some fallouts, like negatively affecting folks who have been relying on the current behaviour, but I do not see a fundamental reason why that hook should not trigger there (it may not trigger in the current implementation, but I view it as lack of need so far, not a deliberate omission). > I guess the next best solution would be to also have a pre-push hook > that performs the same checks again, just in case the bad code managed > to get past the pre-commit hook for some reason or other. This feels > very redundant, but I guess it would work well. I'd say pre-receive would be the most sensible place to check things like this. Some of your developers may not have pre-commit hook or even run "commit --no-verify" to bypass the local check, and if you have a central meeting place for the efforts by all your folks, that is where you want to enforce the policy. Checks done anywhere else are what are redundant, including the pre-commit hook in individual developers. You can view them as a way for individual developers to save their time---by choosing to check locally, they make sure their commits do not trigger the pre-receive hook at the central place. -- 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
