Re: [PATCH 1/5] run-command: add preliminary support for multiple hooks

> "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:
>> +static int has_hook(struct strbuf *path, int strip)
>> +{
>> +	if (access(path->buf, X_OK) < 0) {
> 
> Does ".git/post-commit" that is not an executable exist?
> 
> It was perfectly fine for find_hook() to say "there is no hook for
> post-commit" in the old world in such a case, because the
> unexecutable file it found is not going to be run anyway.
> 
> But it is not clear if has_hook(), that affects "there is no single
> hook file for post-commit, so let's look at post-commit.d" decision
> made by find_hooks(), should behave that way.  It somehow feels more
> intuitive if a post-commit file that is not executable, by merely
> existing, stops post-commit.d directory from being scanned, at least
> to me.