From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Git and Scmbug integration Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:27:42 -0800 Message-ID: <7vk5olpqep.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1194980792.4106.6.camel@localhost> <1194998142.4106.24.camel@localhost> <1194999404.4106.40.camel@localhost> <7vprydpr5o.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Kristis Makris" , jnareb@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, scmbug-users@lists.mkgnu.net To: "David Symonds" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 14 02:28:09 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Is731-0000DH-Lz for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 14 Nov 2007 02:28:08 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752606AbXKNB1v (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:27:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752622AbXKNB1v (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:27:51 -0500 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:56449 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752367AbXKNB1u (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:27:50 -0500 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5F772F0; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:28:11 -0500 (EST) 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 sceptre.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F70395859; Tue, 13 Nov 2007 20:28:05 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (David Symonds's message of "Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:16:47 +1100") 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: "David Symonds" writes: > Reading HEAD would be fine. I guess it just seems a sensible and more > direct path to passing that information so that the hook has less to > do. It seems quite a simple thing that would be very helpful to hook > writers, with zero impact on everyone else. You cannot just say "The hook did not get any parameter, nobody would have cared, this does not regress." Some anal people could have checked and checked "test $# = 0" at the beginning to make sure their hooks do not get broken by random interface changes on the git side. Now their carefully written script errors out as designed. Also some people seem to use different version of git on the same repository (e.g. NFS mounted across hosts that run different versions of git). I would 80% agree with you if the post-comit hook interface were written in the way your patch does from day one. Unfortunately that is not the case. The remaining 20%? If we _were_ to change the hook interface, I would also pass which branch the commit is added to, in addition to what commit it is. Both are easily obtainable by reading HEAD (you need to read HEAD twice, though) but would be handy.