[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: why lines of hooks?

From: <kfogel_at_collab.net>
Date: 2001-08-09 00:17:06 CEST

Greg Stein <gstein@lyra.org> writes:
> Euh... I don't understand why the repos/conf/*.txt files are *text* files
> containing lists of programs to invoke for the hooks. Why aren't they simply
> shell scripts? IOW, why the indirection?
>
> If the repos/conf/ files are simple shell scripts, with $1 and $2 and
> whatnot as the arguments, then they can invoke any number of further
> programs or scripts.
>
> That would simplify a bunch of code, reduce the "semantic overhead" of the
> hooks, etc.
>
> Is there a specific reason for the current setup? Or just following the
> legacy of CVS? :-)

I simply didn't think of it -- you're right, it's legacy. :-)

Your idea is lovely, we should do it. I think it's probably a
_really_ change, too, just a matter of losing some code. I'll look
into it tomorrow and likely do it, unless there's some unexpectedly
complicated side-effect.

We don't even need to insist that they be shell scripts, they'll just
be programs that are passed certain arguments in a certain order.
We'll ship with shell scripts there by default, with explanatory
comments in them. The scripts names will be `pre-commit',
`post-commit', etc. Most users will just add stuff to the scripts,
but really ambitious sites can replace them wholesale.

Thanks!

-K

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:35 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.