Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

2016-04-26 Thread Junio C Hamano
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > I think it's fair enough to say that if we had this facility this > would be good enough: > > * Your hooks are executed in glob() order, local .git first, then > /etc/git/... > > * If it's a hook like pre-commit that can reject something the first > hook to fa

Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

2016-04-26 Thread Marc Branchaud
On 2016-04-26 12:09 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: Basically you can look at patches to a project on a spectrum of: 1. You hacked something up locally 2. It's in someone's *.git repo as a POC 3. It's a third-party patch series used by a bunch of people 4. In an official release but

Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

2016-04-26 Thread Christian Couder
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Marc Branchaud wrote: >> On 2016-04-26 06:58 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >>> >>> Makes sense to have an experimental.* config tree for git for stuff like >>> this. >> >> I disagree. >> >> *

Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

2016-04-26 Thread Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Marc Branchaud wrote: > On 2016-04-26 06:58 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> >> Makes sense to have an experimental.* config tree for git for stuff like >> this. > > I disagree. > > * If the point is to express some kind of warning to users, I think the > com

Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

2016-04-26 Thread Marc Branchaud
On 2016-04-26 06:58 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > Makes sense to have an experimental.* config tree for git for stuff like this. I disagree. * If the point is to express some kind of warning to users, I think the community has been much better served by leaving experimental settings und

Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

2016-04-26 Thread Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > >> The reason for supporting the *.d directories was that I spotted a lot >> of hooks people had hacked up at work using the pee(1) command[1] to >> run sequences of other unrelated hook commands. > > IIRC,

Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

2016-04-25 Thread Junio C Hamano
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > The reason for supporting the *.d directories was that I spotted a lot > of hooks people had hacked up at work using the pee(1) command[1] to > run sequences of other unrelated hook commands. IIRC, we wanted to do this several years ago but after discussion deci

RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

2016-04-22 Thread Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 1:33 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > Change the hardcoded lookup for .git/hooks/* to optionally lookup in > $(git config core.hooksDirectory)/* instead if that config key is set. I think this'll do for my use-case, but I started with a rather more ambitious patch that