From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Configuring a third-party git hook Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:38:16 -0400 Message-ID: <20140320233816.GC7774@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Kevin , git To: Chris Angelico X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Mar 21 00:38:25 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WQmXX-0008PQ-0W for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 00:38:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759997AbaCTXiS (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:38:18 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:43623 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1759652AbaCTXiS (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:38:18 -0400 Received: (qmail 29084 invoked by uid 102); 20 Mar 2014 23:38:18 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 20 Mar 2014 18:38:18 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 20 Mar 2014 19:38:16 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 03:51:16AM +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > > 1. I would say yes. git config is made to be extended and doesn't > > require a config item to be known. > > 2. Namespacing the config items like you did is a good thing to do so > > it won't interfere with other options. > > Excellent! Thank you. > > Is this documented anywhere? The git config man page says to look to > other git man pages: > > https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-config.html#_variables > > A comment there to the effect that "Third party tools may also define > their own variables" or something would make it clear that this is the > intention. I think this sentence from the section you linked is meant to express that: You will find a description of non-core porcelain configuration variables in the respective porcelain documentation. but it is rather opaque, isn't it? You did not know it, but your hook is a non-core porcelain. :) I think it could probably be re-worded, and possibly even indicate to authors of other programs that they are free to make up their own variables (but should take care with namespacing them appropriately). Would you like to try your hand at writing a patch? -Peff