Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Multiple hook support

2019-05-15 Thread Jeff King
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 01:59:28AM +, brian m. carlson wrote: > There are two aspects here which I think are worth discussing. Let's > discuss the inheritance issue first. > > Order with multiple hooks matters. The best hook as an example for this > is prepare-commit-msg. If I have a hook whi

Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Multiple hook support

2019-05-15 Thread brian m. carlson
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 07:26:53PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > brian m. carlson wrote: > In other words, use the standard config convention for the set of > hooks, and treat the order in which they are invoked as a separate > question. You could even use the hooks.d style alphabetical order >

Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Multiple hook support

2019-05-15 Thread Jonathan Nieder
brian m. carlson wrote: > Also, this is the way that most other programs on Unix do this behavior, > and I think that is a compelling argument for this design in and of > itself. I think Unix has generally made the best decisions in operating > system design, and I aim to emulate it as much as pos

Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Multiple hook support

2019-05-14 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 7:23 AM brian m. carlson wrote: > > This series introduces multiple hook support. > > I've thought a lot about the discussion over whether this series should > use the configuration as the source for multiple hooks. Ultimately, I've > come to the decision that it's not a go

Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Multiple hook support

2019-05-13 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Hi, brian m. carlson wrote: > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 05:51:01PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> brian m. carlson wrote: >>> the fact that inheritance in the configuration >>> is in-order and can't be easily modified means that it's not likely to >>> be very useful, but

Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Multiple hook support

2019-05-13 Thread brian m. carlson
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 05:51:01PM -0700, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > brian m. carlson wrote: > > > I've thought a lot about the discussion over whether this series should > > use the configuration as the source for multiple hooks. Ultimately, I've > > come to the decision that it's not a go

Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] Multiple hook support

2019-05-13 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Hi, brian m. carlson wrote: > I've thought a lot about the discussion over whether this series should > use the configuration as the source for multiple hooks. Ultimately, I've > come to the decision that it's not a good idea. Even adopting the empty > entry as a reset marker, the fact that inher

[PATCH v2 0/7] Multiple hook support

2019-05-13 Thread brian m. carlson
This series introduces multiple hook support. I've thought a lot about the discussion over whether this series should use the configuration as the source for multiple hooks. Ultimately, I've come to the decision that it's not a good idea. Even adopting the empty entry as a reset marker, the fact t