Re: Adding custom hooks to a bare repository.

[Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>]

Hi,

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Thomas Adam wrote:

> 2008/7/28 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
>
> > Yes.  Hooks, just as the config and reflogs, are supposed to be local 
> > things.  Rationale being: it is rude, and also insecure, to install 
> > something that potentially calls other programs without the user 
> > saying so.
> 
> Oh absolutely, I agree with that.
> 
> > All you can do is checking in a copy of the hook, and ask your 
> > users/check in your build system that it is installed.
> 
> Hmm -- perhaps I am being unintentionally dense, but I am assuming
> that when you say "checking in a copy" you mean anywhere other than
> .git/hooks/ since that isn't tracked by git.  I have no problem with
> the rationale you've just described -- but it would be handy to add
> this post-merge hook script into hooks/ (exec bit removed) such that
> on a clone, all one would need to do is chmod +x it.   If that's
> possible, I'm clearly missing the steps to enable this.

No, as you said, anything in .git/ is not meant to be tracked.  Besides, 
if a user would change the executable bit (as advised), Git would always 
show this file as modified, making the tree permanently dirty (or worse, 
it could be accidentally be committed as executable).

For all those reasons, it is better to just commit an executable script in 
your <toplevel>/githooks/post-merge and ask your users to copy it to 
.git/hooks/.

Hth,
Dscho