Motd message on git cloning

Motd message on git cloning

[Adam Stankiewicz]

I'm dreaming about git feature that shows custom message on git clone.
It would be extremely helpful for informing the person cloning about
init scripts he/she need to execute (for example submodule inits or
hooks set up). For now there is no way to make sure cloning person
will receive such message (unless he/she will read the README).

The server does not need to know if it's fetch or clone, if programmer
executes git clone on client side, then the MOTD message would be
shown.

I think good candidate for MOTD message is .git/description (because
for now no one seems to care about setting repository description).
Another option is to introduce .git/motd file that would consist of
some maximum number of non-control ASCII characters.

I don't really see any security concerns. Git could filter any control
characters from MOTD out, and automation script could add --no-motd
flag. The could also be limit on MOTD file size so no one could
"flood" the terminal window with MOTD messages.

Also it's important to me that such message would be shown
automatically by default and could be turned off, not the other way
(for example --motd flag).

Some other tools like brew package manager have this feature from the
beginning and I find it extremely helpful.

What do you think?

Re: Motd message on git cloning

[Drew Northup]

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Adam Stankiewicz <sheerun@sher.pl> wrote:
> I'm dreaming about git feature that shows custom message on git clone.
> It would be extremely helpful for informing the person cloning about
> init scripts he/she need to execute (for example submodule inits or
> hooks set up). For now there is no way to make sure cloning person
> will receive such message (unless he/she will read the README).

So we should clog up the output (which may contain important error
messages) just to protect the user from themselves?

> The server does not need to know if it's fetch or clone, if programmer
> executes git clone on client side, then the MOTD message would be
> shown.
>
> I think good candidate for MOTD message is .git/description (because
> for now no one seems to care about setting repository description).
> Another option is to introduce .git/motd file that would consist of
> some maximum number of non-control ASCII characters.
>
> I don't really see any security concerns. Git could filter any control
> characters from MOTD out, and automation script could add --no-motd
> flag. The could also be limit on MOTD file size so no one could
> "flood" the terminal window with MOTD messages.

While I think that it is helpful and sometimes important to set the
description (especially for public repositories) I suspect that if
somebody is cloning it then they already have a good chance of knowing
what _should_ be in that file. This isn't a text-interactive session
on an FTP server of yore.

> Also it's important to me that such message would be shown
> automatically by default and could be turned off, not the other way
> (for example --motd flag).

Ummm....NO. I cannot see this being an improvement for enough users to
justify the extra noise.

Granted, I am not the definitive word on much of anything around here,
but I cannot see this making much sense in the big picture of things.
If you wanted to make this change to something more like Google's
"repo" wrapper script that would make at least some modicum of sense
to me.

-- 
-Drew Northup
--------------------------------------------------------------
"As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?"
-John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59

Re: Motd message on git cloning

[Adam Stankiewicz]

It we would agree that .git/motd should serve as MOTD file then at the
beginning there would be no noise at all, because currently no
repository contains that file.

I don't think developers would place there non-critical information
about the repository. The community would blame them for that.

Also if one does not like any additional noise, no one prevents him
from adding --no-motd flag as the default.

Thank you for attention.

On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Drew Northup <n1xim.email@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Adam Stankiewicz <sheerun@sher.pl> wrote:
>> I'm dreaming about git feature that shows custom message on git clone.
>> It would be extremely helpful for informing the person cloning about
>> init scripts he/she need to execute (for example submodule inits or
>> hooks set up). For now there is no way to make sure cloning person
>> will receive such message (unless he/she will read the README).
>
> So we should clog up the output (which may contain important error
> messages) just to protect the user from themselves?
>
>> The server does not need to know if it's fetch or clone, if programmer
>> executes git clone on client side, then the MOTD message would be
>> shown.
>>
>> I think good candidate for MOTD message is .git/description (because
>> for now no one seems to care about setting repository description).
>> Another option is to introduce .git/motd file that would consist of
>> some maximum number of non-control ASCII characters.
>>
>> I don't really see any security concerns. Git could filter any control
>> characters from MOTD out, and automation script could add --no-motd
>> flag. The could also be limit on MOTD file size so no one could
>> "flood" the terminal window with MOTD messages.
>
> While I think that it is helpful and sometimes important to set the
> description (especially for public repositories) I suspect that if
> somebody is cloning it then they already have a good chance of knowing
> what _should_ be in that file. This isn't a text-interactive session
> on an FTP server of yore.
>
>> Also it's important to me that such message would be shown
>> automatically by default and could be turned off, not the other way
>> (for example --motd flag).
>
> Ummm....NO. I cannot see this being an improvement for enough users to
> justify the extra noise.
>
> Granted, I am not the definitive word on much of anything around here,
> but I cannot see this making much sense in the big picture of things.
> If you wanted to make this change to something more like Google's
> "repo" wrapper script that would make at least some modicum of sense
> to me.
>
> --
> -Drew Northup
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> "As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?"
> -John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59