On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 03:47:57PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote: > I tried to follow your hook script, but I gave up where the "trivial" > stuff ended: (1) perl is too much of a "write-only language" when data > structures become complicated; > :D i've been pondering (re-)doing it in python, but i'd have to force myself to do it simply because i know perl a lot better. also, i have to defend my image of doing stuff no-one else understands. :D
> (2) I don't see the need for sophisticated branch analysis[*]. > well, realistically speaking you are right. i want the simple case of simultaneously pushing several commits on one branch and a forward-merge on another branch to work, as that's a semi-expected case. everything else is, uhm, intellectual masturbation. :D now to more important, kde-related questions. kde's post-commit svn hook does a lot of checks on the committed code (and the committer himself). some of these would be better served with a pre-receive hook (with the possibility to override), and for the developer's convenience also a post-commit hook for local installation. however, a pre-receive hook obviously requires the ability for kde to install hooks on gitorious. it's fine if it needs to be reviewed and actually installed by gitorious staff, but the possibility needs to exist as such. for the post-receive hook, one can do some bizarre remote notification stuff on the side of gitorious, but a real hook would be much simpler. then the server would need a local mta, too, so notification mails never get lost. johan? the alternative would be kde hosting an own instance of gitorious on a kde-owned server. _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
