Re: [RFE] pre/post-stash hooks

[Chris Packham <judge.packham@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Scott R. Godin
<scottg.wp-hackers@mhg2.com> wrote:
> giving this a bump since I haven't received any replies on it yet, and it's
> a valid question, IMHO.
>
> On 02/19/2010 12:33 PM, Scott R. Godin wrote:
>>
>> While I had known about git stash, and just never used it, I'd finally
>> gotten to the point where it was needed, only to discover something that
>> I found interesting.
>>
>> My use case may a bit rare at the moment, I'll admit, but not at all
>> far-fetched, and probably growing in usage as time goes on.
>>
>> In contrib/hooks is the script 'setgitperms.perl' which, when added to
>> pre-commit, post-merge, and post-checkout, makes sure to track the file
>> permissions fully, not just +/-x. This can be vitally important for
>> webdevelopers who must keep certain permissions on certain directories,
>> such as for e-commerce solutions like Magento, etc, so that the clients
>> may upload new product images through the interface rather than via ftp.
>>
>> However when I recently used stash to push some changes aside while I
>> did something else first, and then ran git stash pop, I realized that
>> there weren't any hooks that would enable setgitperms.perl to be
>> ensuring/tracking the file permissions are applied correctly after stash
>> usage.
>>
>> Granted that full directory/file permissions may not be all that
>> important to some of you coders, but I can assure you that web
>> developers may not see it that way.
>>
>> Again granted, I could probably set up a Makefile, but not everyone
>> knows how to do that (particularly those webdevelopers who aren't coders
>> who would typically be familiar with Makefiles.
>>
>> Also granted I could probably find a way to work around this issue with
>> an alias, but my thought is that I shouldn't have to.
>>
>> There are some of us who exist who have this funny thought that
>> computers should be able to do things for us without us having to
>> explicitly tell them to, specifically, every time. We'd prefer to set
>> things up generally "just do this EVERY time for EVERYthing" and forget
>> about it, and let the computer handle it. I'm sure you're familiar with
>> us, since we are us. :-)
>>
>> So, with this in mind, in addition to requesting pre/post-stash hooks
>> just for this alone, I'd like to solicit some thought from the rest of
>> you as to potential possible usages/requirements for said hooks for
>> reasons _other_ than running 'setgitperms.perl'
>>
>> Are there any reasons why pre/post-stash hooks _shouldn't_ exist?
>>
>> How difficult would it be to implement?
>>

Well for my 2 cents I've always seen stash as a way to prevent me
having to deal with a commit/merge right now when I get
interrupted/distracted. The things I stash usually don't work and
aren't complete, otherwise I would have committed them. Which really
is my answer to your question, pre-commit hooks exist so anything that
needs to be guaranteed in an automated way can still be done when it
really matters. As a git user I wouldn't find pre/post stash hooks
useful because its not something I'd use in my work-flow. But if it's
your itch go for it, don't let me put you off from floating a patch on
the list.