From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA134203E4 for ; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 21:13:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932345AbcGZVMO (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jul 2016 17:12:14 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:65022 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932318AbcGZVMM (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jul 2016 17:12:12 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A32E2FE07; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 17:12:11 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=hPyekq5mhjhj6MDr6Ej0P7Bp27s=; b=uVTt3F zuQpYGa8kVFvv76vvx0lkvhtDigvSkJiHgaxY8M9n73JGQXR+HZNnahFZJ1F7TI8 hAZJ2SPIVI6E+OjX2MW3JBIyqsKDqR4eDRnCL0PYlHbR7jj2WQYM/q0DipPvcauL xu/zrjt3CkAM6sDWT23xK3+7T3JlZUonJXg1Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Fx8sgxkh5/u0KtQMeuxcqDNlaiplI8Ox HtOYETvsqWupkQoO7nf2i3+DaGo6LZnTztbbq61s9JQLmfiFqi1C4AKKJHvaVL8H MxL2vqgRCV8ppzJ9B3CdTw2Rv9pDU9cdzInG8jRw77ZfEzvIBGGpjmLXIa5qAjPx t3fAXGW7j6o= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13CF32FE06; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 17:12:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BE8A2FE05; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 17:12:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Orgad Shaneh , git Subject: Re: [PATCH] merge: Run commit-msg hook References: <1469519323-11420-1-git-send-email-orgad.shaneh@audiocodes.com> Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 14:12:08 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 26 Jul 2016 16:54:06 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 9DD7C352-5375-11E6-A3FE-89D312518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > FWIW I dug out the original submission: > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/151297/focus=151435 > > It seems that there was no discussion about the commit-msg. Which makes me > wonder why nobody thought of this. I actually think it was a mistaken argument. We could have devised a mechanism to prevent "git commit" that concludes a conflicted "git merge" from calling the hook to resolve the inconsistency, and the solution would have been equally valid. I'd rather not make things worse by repeating that same mistake. If we were to change anything, we should be adding prepare-merge-msg as you suggested earlier and weaning people off of the current behaviour that was added by mistake. Thanks.