From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add post-merge hook. Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 16:07:27 -0700 Message-ID: <7v7inc7hao.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <11885136172952-git-send-email-jjengla@sandia.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: jjengla@sandia.gov X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Aug 31 01:07:41 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IQt6u-0006MC-9c for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:07:36 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762335AbXH3XHc (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:07:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759965AbXH3XHc (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:07:32 -0400 Received: from rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.210.124.37]:55641 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759548AbXH3XHb (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:07:31 -0400 Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BB4D12B6B3; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:07:51 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <11885136172952-git-send-email-jjengla@sandia.gov> (jjengla@sandia.gov's message of "Thu, 30 Aug 2007 16:40:17 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: jjengla@sandia.gov writes: > From: Josh England > > This adds a post-merge hook that will run after `git pull` operations > if enabled. The hook is passed no arguments and cannot affect the > outcome of a merge. > > Signed-off-by: Josh England Thanks for your patch. Two questions. * Do you want to run the post-merge hook even for a squash merge? * After resolving a conflicted merge, you would conclude it with "git commit"; don't you want to have the same hook apply at the commit time, or is that what you expect the user to deal with with post-commit hook? And two requests and a half. - We would want a new test in the test suite for this, to make sure that later changes by others would not break this new feature you would depend upon. - You described _what_ the patch and the new feature do in the log message and in the documentation. You need to also explain _why_ somebody might want to have such a hook in his repository. . In the documentation, you would want to make the reader realize "aha, this is something that would help me" with an example. . In the log message, you would want to make sure other people understand why this new feature was added, what the design consideration were at the point of the feature was added. The latter is important to me personally. I want to have something better than "this change does not break anything existing, and it is something somebody wants to get added, so while I can not image the exact use scenario why anybody would want to use such a hook I'd apply the change" to convince myself. - We are deep in feature-freeze for 1.5.3; I'd appreciate a resend for any patch that is not a bugfix / documentation update after 1.5.3 final.