Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] hook: introduce the report hook for git-receive-pack(1)

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 08:57:12AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> 
> > Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> ---
> >> Changes in v3:
> >> - Move out addition of proc-receive hook doc to 'git-receive-pack.adoc'
> >>   into a new commit.
> >> - Add a new commit to move out the response generation in receive-pack
> >>   to a new function.
> >> - Instead of die-ing on non-zero exit code, we modify each reference to
> >>   indicate that the hook failed.
> >> - Instead of correctly listing out the protocol, link to
> >>   linkgit:gitprotocol-pack[5], as the protocol also differs between v1
> >>   and v2.
> >> - Link to v2: https://patch.msgid.link/20260821-758-introduce-hook-v2-1-e90e2f7ac2cf@gmail.com
> >
> > This has some interaction with Justin's pluggable writes series.
> > Please help sanity check the conflict resolution I did near the tip
> > of 'seen' when I push the integration results out later today.
> 
> One more thing.  'report' is far too generic a name for this.  There
> are other features that plausibly would want to create their own
> reports.  It is understandable that one can be blinded by the
> thought that their invention is more important than everything else,
> but please resist such temptation.

That's probably on me, as I originally suggested "pre-report" when the
design was still in an earlier stage. But I agree with you -- both
"pre-report" and "report" are awful names. We have others like "update",
which sound way more generic than they really are, but that's not a good
reason to repeat that sin.

A better name might be "receive-report" or something like that.

Patrick