From: Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Pang Yan Han <pangyanhan@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>,
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/2] Teach receive-pack not to run update hook for corrupt/non existent ref
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 05:35:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMK1S_gZFxtCwUnzRU3PocB9LcewZ-f5RyraCebJdaBASODaPg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7voby6zwxg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> In that case (if "non-existent-ref" was indeed non-existent, and not just
>>> pointing at a dangling commit), I would say the post anything hook should
>>> not be called for that ref. These hooks of course need to run if there
>>> are _other_ refs that were updated, though, to handle these _other_ refs,
>>> but I do not think they should be told about the no-op.
>>
>> Question is what happens if none of them existed. It's a difference
>> between not calling the hook at all, versus calling it with no
>> arguments/empty stdin (as the case may be) -- which would you do?
>
> In case it was unclear, I was trying to say the hooks should not run with
> empty input.
I saw "should not be called for that ref" and I did get confused;
thanks for clarifying.
I perfectly fine with it for post-{update,receive}. My interest is in
making sure the *update* hook runs, which (in an earlier email in the
thread) I explained why and you agreed it made sense.
Thanks,
--
Sitaram
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-27 0:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-25 5:06 [PATCH/RFC 0/2] Teach receive-pack not to run update hook for corrupt/non existent ref Pang Yan Han
2011-09-25 5:06 ` [PATCH/RFC 1/2] is_url: Remove redundant assignment Pang Yan Han
2011-09-25 9:26 ` Tay Ray Chuan
2011-09-26 16:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-09-26 21:32 ` Jeff King
2011-09-25 5:06 ` [PATCH/RFC 2/2] receive-pack: Don't run update hook for corrupt or nonexistent ref Pang Yan Han
2011-09-25 17:37 ` [PATCH/RFCv2 2/2] run post-receive and post-update hooks with empty stdin/no args for invalid ref deletion Pang Yan Han
2011-09-25 7:58 ` [PATCH/RFC 0/2] Teach receive-pack not to run update hook for corrupt/non existent ref Sitaram Chamarty
2011-09-25 9:48 ` Pang Yan Han
2011-09-25 12:05 ` Sitaram Chamarty
2011-09-26 23:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-09-26 23:44 ` Sitaram Chamarty
2011-09-26 23:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-09-27 0:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-09-27 9:02 ` Pang Yan Han
2011-09-27 16:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-09-27 22:55 ` Pang Yan Han
2011-09-27 0:05 ` Sitaram Chamarty [this message]
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=CAMK1S_gZFxtCwUnzRU3PocB9LcewZ-f5RyraCebJdaBASODaPg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=sitaramc@gmail.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=pangyanhan@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=spearce@spearce.org \
/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).