William Nagel wrote:
> On Apr 19, 2005, at 5:19 AM, Dirk Schenkewitz wrote:
>
>> William Nagel wrote:
>>
>>> ... Anything that
>>> you write to standard error will be sent back to the client and
>>> displayed.
>>
>>
>> ... but ONLY if the hook returns Failure (that is, return code is
>> different from 0) and thus reject the commit.
>
>
> My bad. I forgot that it was only sent back if the script failed.
Well, the book isn't too bold about this, I found out by experimenting.
> So was there a specific rationale behind only allowing the hook script
> to communicate back on an error, or was that a design tradeoff because
> it was easier to only send things back on a failure? It seems to me
> that there are a lot of times when it would be useful to send back
> information about a successful commit. For example, if an issue in the
> issue tracker is closed as a result of the commit, it might be handy to
> return a URL to the closed issue, for sanity check purposes.
>
> -Bill
*grin* Thanks, Bill! Being a newbie, I didn't dare to ask, but that's
exactly what I asked myself. :-)
Best regards
Dirk
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Apr 19 19:06:35 2005