Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH v3] run-command: add hint when a hook is ignored

Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Quite honestly, I do not particulary think this is confusing, and I
> expect that this change will irritate many people by forcing them to
> either set the advise config or move the ones that they deliberately
> left unexecutable by renaming them by adding ".disabled" at the end.
> But these remedies are easy enough, so let's see how well it works
> by merging it to 'next' and cooking it there for a while.

Well, it turns out that I am among those who are irritated, as all
the repositories I work with were rather old, dating back to 2005,
back when it was a norm to have these sample files installed without
executable bit, to make it easy for those who choose to use them
as-is to enable them by flipping the executable bit.

And I do not find the advice.ignoredhook is giving particularly a
good piece of advice.  I suspect that it would be a better practice
to rename a disabled foo-hook to foo-hook.disabled if the user wants
to squelch the warning.  It gives them a final chance to review what
they left disabled for all these years, and then choose to either
remove it, or rename it to foo-hook.disabled.  "ls .git/hooks/" will
then make it clear which ones are disabled without the "-F" option,
which is an additional benefit.

Anyway, I am not merging this topic to the upcoming release, so
hopefully we'll hear from others who try 'next'.