threads / discuss / 14716

Adding custom hooks to a bare repository.

Subject: Adding custom hooks to a bare repository.

## tl;dr

5 messages between Jul 28, 2008 and Jul 28, 2008.

replies: 4people: 2as markdown or json

Thomas Adam· Jul 28, 2008, 11:04 UTC · lore
Hello all,

I'm trying to add in "post-merge" as a valid hook file to an already created --bare repository. In adding it to the correct place and setting the correct permissions on it (the repository is a shared one), it doesn't seem to be pulled down with the other hook files already present when doing a "git clone".

Any ideas why?

Indeed, I also, as a test, added this post-merge hook to a repository and created a --bare repository from that - thinking that perhaps the hook file had to present at the time of creating a new repository, but even then it wasn't copied over to the bare repository.

What am I doing wrong?
Thanks in advance,
-- Thomas Adam
Johannes Schindelin· Jul 28, 2008, 11:26 UTC · re: Thomas Adam · lore

Re: Adding custom hooks to a bare repository.

Hi,
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Thomas Adam wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> I'm trying to add in "post-merge" as a valid hook file to an already 
> created --bare repository.  In adding it to the correct place and 
> setting the correct permissions on it (the repository is a shared one), 
> it doesn't seem to be pulled down with the other hook files already 
> present when doing a "git clone".
> 
> Any ideas why?

Yes. Hooks, just as the config and reflogs, are supposed to be local things. Rationale being: it is rude, and also insecure, to install something that potentially calls other programs without the user saying so.

All you can do is checking in a copy of the hook, and ask your users/check in your build system that it is installed.

Hth, Dscho

Thomas Adam· Jul 28, 2008, 12:32 UTC · re: Johannes Schindelin · lore

Re: Adding custom hooks to a bare repository.

2008/7/28 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
> Yes.  Hooks, just as the config and reflogs, are supposed to be local
> things.  Rationale being: it is rude, and also insecure, to install
> something that potentially calls other programs without the user saying
> so.
Oh absolutely, I agree with that.
> All you can do is checking in a copy of the hook, and ask your users/check
> in your build system that it is installed.

Hmm -- perhaps I am being unintentionally dense, but I am assuming that when you say "checking in a copy" you mean anywhere other than .git/hooks/ since that isn't tracked by git. I have no problem with the rationale you've just described -- but it would be handy to add this post-merge hook script into hooks/ (exec bit removed) such that on a clone, all one would need to do is chmod +x it. If that's possible, I'm clearly missing the steps to enable this.

Thanks,
-- Thomas Adam
Johannes Schindelin· Jul 28, 2008, 12:40 UTC · re: Thomas Adam · lore

Re: Adding custom hooks to a bare repository.

Hi,
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Thomas Adam wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> 2008/7/28 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
>
> > Yes.  Hooks, just as the config and reflogs, are supposed to be local 
> > things.  Rationale being: it is rude, and also insecure, to install 
> > something that potentially calls other programs without the user 
> > saying so.
> 
> Oh absolutely, I agree with that.
> 
> > All you can do is checking in a copy of the hook, and ask your 
> > users/check in your build system that it is installed.
> 
> Hmm -- perhaps I am being unintentionally dense, but I am assuming
> that when you say "checking in a copy" you mean anywhere other than
> .git/hooks/ since that isn't tracked by git.  I have no problem with
> the rationale you've just described -- but it would be handy to add
> this post-merge hook script into hooks/ (exec bit removed) such that
> on a clone, all one would need to do is chmod +x it.   If that's
> possible, I'm clearly missing the steps to enable this.

No, as you said, anything in .git/ is not meant to be tracked. Besides, if a user would change the executable bit (as advised), Git would always show this file as modified, making the tree permanently dirty (or worse, it could be accidentally be committed as executable).

For all those reasons, it is better to just commit an executable script in your <toplevel>/githooks/post-merge and ask your users to copy it to .git/hooks/.

Hth, Dscho

Thomas Adam· Jul 28, 2008, 12:40 UTC · re: Johannes Schindelin · lore

Re: Adding custom hooks to a bare repository.

2008/7/28 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
> For all those reasons, it is better to just commit an executable script in
> your <toplevel>/githooks/post-merge and ask your users to copy it to
> .git/hooks/.
Grand.  Thank you very much.  :)
-- Thomas Adam

← back to recent threads