1. Emily: hooks in the config file. Sent a read only patch, but didn’t
get much traction. Add a new header in the config file, then have prefix
number so that security scan could be configured at system level that
would run last, and then hook could also be configured at the project
level.
2. Peff: Having hooks in the config would be nice. But don’t do it at
`hooks.prereceive`, but use a subconfig like `hooks.prereceive.command`
so it’s possible to add options later on.
3. Brian: sometimes the need to overridden, ordering works for me. For
Git LFS it would be helpful to have a pre-push hook for LFS, and a
different one for something else. Want flexibility about finding and
discovering hooks.
4. Emily: if you want to specify a hook that is in the work tree, then
it has to be configured after cloning.
5. Jonathan: It’s better to start with something low complexity as
long as it can be extended/changed later. If there's room to tweak it
over time then I'm not too worried about the initial version being
perfect — we can make mistakes and learn from them. A challenge will
be how hooks interact. Analogy to the challenges of stacked union
filesystems and security modules in Linux. Analogy to sequence number
allocation for unit scripts
6. CB: Declare dependencies instead of a sequence number? In theory
independent hooks can also run in parallel.
7. Peff: Maybe that’s something to not worry about from the start.
Like, how many hooks do you expect to run anyway.
8. Christian: At booking.com they use a lot of hooks, and they also sent
patches to the mailing list to improve that.
9. Emily: In-tree hooks?
10. Brian: You can do `git cat-file <ref> | sh` to run a hook.
11. Brandon: Is it possible to globally to disable all hooks locally? It
might be a security concern. Or is it something we might want to add?
12. Peff: No it’s not.