Re: [PATCH 1/3] git-merge: Honor pre-merge hook

On 09/05/2012 03:39 PM, Michael J Gruber wrote:

What exactly is an "automatic merge commit"? Is it any merge that doesn't have a conflict? A merge that doesn't invoke the editor? A merge done as part of another operation (e.g., pull)? I don't see the term mentioned in the git-merge or githooks man pages.

I think it would be good if you would define this term in the documentation files that your patch touched, and perhaps in the githooks section about "pre-commit" as well.

Secondly, though it is impossible (for backwards compatibility reasons) for the pre-commit hook to be invoked for automatic merges, no such considerations prohibit the pre-merge commit from being invoked for non-automatic merges. In other words, both hooks, pre-commit *and* pre-merge, could be invoked for non-automatic merges. Would this be preferable?

It depends on what pre-merge scripts are likely to be used for. If they will tend to be used for merge-specific actions, then it might be more convenient for *all* merges to be vetted by them. On the other hand, if they tend to do the same actions as pre-commit hooks, then having non-automatic merge commits go through both hooks would tend to be more annoying than helpful. Specifically, one of the scripts would probably have to check whether the merge is a non-automatic merge, and if so do nothing (i.e., letting the other script take care of it). This would also require an easy way for a script to determine whether a commit is a non-automatic merge commit.

Have you considered this?

Michael