Re: [PATCH] Add post-merge hook.

From: Josh England <jjengla@sandia.gov>
Date: Sep 4, 2007, 16:25 UTC
Message-ID: <1188923110.6192.15.camel@beauty>
In-Reply-To: <7v7inc7hao.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Sorry for late response --- *long* weekend.  :)

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 16:07 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> > This adds a post-merge hook that will run after `git pull` operations
> > if enabled.  The hook is passed no arguments and cannot affect the
> > outcome of a merge.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josh England <jjengla@sandia.gov>
> 
> Thanks for your patch.
> 
> Two questions.
> 
>  * Do you want to run the post-merge hook even for a squash
>    merge?

Yes. I'd like to run it at any time that the working tree might be updated.

>  * After resolving a conflicted merge, you would conclude it
>    with "git commit"; don't you want to have the same hook apply
>    at the commit time, or is that what you expect the user to
>    deal with with post-commit hook?

I wouldn't want the post-merge hook running there because (in my case) it needs to do something slightly different than the post-commit hook, and would seem counter-intuitive to me. The pre-commit and post-commit hooks are already there and handle that scenario nicely.

Show 5 quoted lines

> And two requests and a half.
> 
>  - We would want a new test in the test suite for this, to make
>    sure that later changes by others would not break this new
>    feature you would depend upon.

Can do. You want me to resubmit the original patch along with tests or submit the tests as a new patch?

Show 14 quoted lines

>  - You described _what_ the patch and the new feature do in the
>    log message and in the documentation.
> 
>    You need to also explain _why_ somebody might want to have
>    such a hook in his repository.
> 
>    . In the documentation, you would want to make the reader
>      realize "aha, this is something that would help me" with an
>      example.
> 
>    . In the log message, you would want to make sure other
>      people understand why this new feature was added, what the
>      design consideration were at the point of the feature was
>      added.

I may have to come up with a use-case that is more mainstream than mine. I'm personally using it to update permissions/ownership in the working tree based on a git-controlled file (created by pre-commit). I'll post the script when its fully fleshed out. Should I just put "If you're doing something crazy like me, this hook may be useful." :)

>  - We are deep in feature-freeze for 1.5.3; I'd appreciate a
>    resend for any patch that is not a bugfix / documentation
>    update after 1.5.3 final.

Sure thing. It looks like the 1.5.4 cycled just started. I'll resend with the additions you requested.

-JE