Our group could really use a pre-pull hook. Is there already a way to do
this? I wrote a little wrapper script in bash for it, but that's not ideal.
Here is our use case:
The code in our repo is coupled to a database. We have made it so that all
the parts of the database that are controlled
Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 08:52:48AM -0700, B. Lachele Foley wrote:
>
> > Our group could really use a pre-pull hook. Is there already a way to
> do
> > this? I wrote a little wrapper script in bash for it, but that's not
> ideal.
> >
> > Here is our use case:
hy [see Git dev mailing list]
>
> https://public-inbox.org/git/CAP8UFD0XS3vsB1n_Jm=4TrdXqc8zU9+3LBU5CFn5TDYhYgf=2...@mail.gmail.com/
>
> >
> >
> > Hoping I haven't totally misunderstood what's required..
> > --
> > Philip
> >
> > On 0
I think that I have not properly communicated what we are doing and why we
are asking for this thing that seems irrational.
Before trying to do that, let me respond to a few other things.
If you had a pre-merge hook, then it would run even on local merges between
> branches.
>
This is where a
ng it under any directory on the user's $PATH - so that if you put
a file named "foo" under, say, /usr/local/bin, then running `git foo`
will make the Git front-end program to find that /usr/local/bin/foo and
execute it. "
On Monday, October 1, 2018 at 11:21:01 AM UTC-4, B. Lachel
its 'repo'.
So, we need a hook. We are fond of learning about this problem before the
fetch happens, but it definitely has to happen pre-merge.
On Thursday, September 27, 2018 at 11:52:48 AM UTC-4, B. Lachele Foley
wrote:
>
> Our group could really use a pre-pull hook. Is there alr
We talked about this at group meeting this morning. We had just been
discussing a realization similar to Michael Gersten's observation about
needing a "special merge" when we saw his post come in. Moments before
that we had decided that we probably do want it to be a pre-fetch hook.
That
