On Tue, 06 Aug 2019, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 12:58 PM Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 11:52, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 12:50 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 12:42 PM Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@intel.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Make it possible for the server side git pre-receive hook to determine
>> > > > the client is dim and refuse the push otherwise.
>> > > >
>> > > > Obviously it's possible to set the push-option manually on the git
>> > > > command line as well, but there's really no plausible denial in that
>> > > > case.
>> > > >
>> > > > Cc: Daniel Stone <dan...@fooishbar.org>
>> > > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>
>> > > > Cc: Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com>
>> > > > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <jani.nik...@intel.com>
>> > [stupid gmail]
>> >
>> > I think a
>> >
>> > function dim_push
>> > {
>> > git push $DRY_RUN $dim_fdo_cookie $@
>> > }
>> >
>> > Would be really nice refactor. Except for the 1 case where we use $DRY
>> > and have a reason.
>> >
>> I agree that minimising the duplicated is a plus, yet dim_push already
>> exists:
>>
>> function dim_push
>> {
>> dim_push_branch $(git_current_branch) "$@"
>> }
>>
>> Regardless, the patch covers _all_ the "git push" instances in DIM and is:
>> Reviewed-by: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com>
>
> Hm right, would need to name it internal_push or so, also to avoid it
> becoming a new subcmd.
Shall we leave the refactoring to the future? Okay with this one?
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
dim-tools mailing list
dim-tools@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dim-tools
