Re: what are the chances of a 'pre-upload' hook?

From: Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 28, 2011, 09:21 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMK1S_jskf-ztZXtz=Pg7nOoX03j8-VizOEoRFOzL-d=5MqxKw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20111128080145.GB16901@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:

Show 16 quoted lines

> On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 10:41:39PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> >> I actually like the idea of allowing pre-upload-pack hook on git:// and
>> >> possibly http:// only....
>> >>
>> >> One scenario I do not want to see is this. Suppose ...
>> >
>> > I'm sorry I started this discussion.  I worked around it, though it's
>> > a bit kludgy, so maybe time to drop the debate.
>>
>> I do not want you to feel sorry, and I do not understand why you feel that
>> way.
>
> Agreed. This is a topic that has come up several times before for other
> users (GitHub and Gentoo come to mind), and which I've given some
> thought to, which is why I'm writing so many words on the subject.

I can see that you have, and I appreciate that.

I was vaguely feeling guilty about *causing* all that extra effort, because I think it is a bit of a waste of time. I sincerely believe there is *no* place for shared setups [1] these days, however common they may be. In fact, if I didn't already believe so, your last few emails would have convinced me!

I'm amazed to learn in this thread that people apparently even *push* in such setups!

[1] not just "upload-pack runs as invoking user" but also other settings like liberal umask, (which you mentioned) and so on.

> As for your kludge, I took a peek at gitpod. I actually think
> intercepting the call to upload-pack is a reasonably sane approach,

Thanks.  I wasn't happy at first but now I'm fine with it.

-- 
Sitaram