Re: cloning/pulling hooks

From: Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>
Date: Aug 29, 2007, 14:41 UTC
Message-ID: <20070829144135.GI1219@pasky.or.cz>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708291529010.28586@racer.site>

Hi!

On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 04:31:29PM CEST, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Petr Baudis wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 04:06:17PM CEST, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > I think that they are way more than just technical issues: the 
> > > chicken-and-egg problem is certainly _not_ a technical issue.
> > 
> > What do you mean by the chicken-and-egg problem? I think I missed that.
> 
> What if hooks/update is in your set?  It _does not_ run before it is 
> checked out, but of course, some ref is updated before it is checked out.

The hook may depend on some other data checked out as well etc., so I think the simple sane solution is to use the new update hook only for the next update; this should match users' expectations as well.

But we got into discussing the details before the fundamentals. :-)

Show 9 quoted lines

> > > _All_ of the arguments I read are along the lines "we want to enforce 
> > > some coding styles" or similar.  These issues are _orthogonal_ to the 
> > > question which SCM is used.
> > 
> > Your company has certain rules on how all the source on the public 
> > branches should look like, etc. It's not quite clear to me how can build 
> > system enforce these rules.
> 
> The same as a hook.  You just put the check into the Makefile.

How exactly does the Makefile affect what does and what does not get checked in?

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
Early to rise and early to bed makes a male healthy and wealthy and dead.
                -- James Thurber