[Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: Re: Having two precommit hooks

[Anand Kumria]

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:36:18 -0700, Thomas Lord wrote:

> 
>     > From: Mikhael Goikhman <address@hidden>
> 
>     > So, returning to the original message that started this subject,
>     > do you think the following hook names are intuitive enough:
> 
>     >         * prepare-commit
>     >         * confirm-commit
>     >         * post-commit
> 
>     > I would avoid precommit, pre-precommit and commit names as ambiguous.
> 
> I don't like the idea of changing the existing names which, while
> perhaps not ideal, aren't really that bad.
> 
> How about:
> 
>       prepare-commit
>       precommit
>       commit
> 
> ? The (made up here) guiding principle being that hooks named after
> commands are called after the command completes ("commit") and that

Isn't the hook already called post-commit? Are you suggesting a name
change, or a 'if I could redo tla, I'd ....'?

> the last hook called before beginning an archive transaction is the
> command name prefixed with "pre" ("precommit"), and that if the
> command operates on a tree and we want a hook that gets first-shot on
> that tree, that's "prepare-" followed by the command name.

Sounds good; so in the general case an hook that looks like 'prepare-' can
modify the tree however it wants - no other hook can though.

Cheers,
Anand

-- 
linux.conf.au 2005   -  http://lca2005.linux.org.au/  -  Birthplace of Tux
April 18th to 23rd   -  http://lca2005.linux.org.au/  -       LINUX
Canberra, Australia  -  http://lca2005.linux.org.au/  -    Get bitten!