From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
"Torsten Bögershausen" <tboegi@web.de>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Add basic syntax check on shell scripts
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 02:30:56 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121205073055.GA5776@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8BtX9fMkGDoVGKzgz7SSinbt0561B1ZKHu6fs+n8ewKGg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 12:43:30PM +0700, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> >> Or a project commit hook?
> >
> > Surely. It is OK to have "cd t && make test-lint" in your
> > pre-commit hook.
>
> No, what I meant is a shared pre-commit script that all git devs are
> encouraged (or forced) to install so bugs are found locally rather
> than after patches are sent to you. The hook content does not really
> matter.
I think that is orthogonal. You would want to implement the guts of such
a hook outside the hook itself, so that it could be run at arbitrary
times. So even if we want such a hook, the development should probably
look like:
1. Implement checks in t/Makefile, triggered by "make test-lint" or
similar.
2. Run "make test-lint" in a hook.
I do not use such a hook myself, but I do run "test-lint" as part of my
"make test", and I "make test" each series I send (and if the series has
non-trivial refactoring, each individual patch of the series to catch
breakages that come and go during refactoring). But I decide when to run
those checks, not a hook.
Anyway, I do think a "shell portability lint" would be a great addition
to "test-lint", but I am slightly skeptical that it will be easy to
write a good one that does not have false positives. Still, there may be
some low-hanging fruit. I have not looked carefully at Torsten's patch
yet.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-05 7:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-02 13:17 [RFC] Add basic syntax check on shell scripts Torsten Bögershausen
2012-12-02 14:30 ` Stefano Lattarini
2012-12-03 16:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-12-04 7:20 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-12-04 19:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-12-05 5:43 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-12-05 6:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-12-05 7:30 ` Jeff King [this message]
2012-12-05 7:54 ` Jeff King
2012-12-05 16:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-12-05 9:11 ` Sebastian Schuberth
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121205073055.GA5776@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=tboegi@web.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).