On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Gé Weijers <g...@weijers.org> wrote: > I don't like timers like that, a single server may have clients on fast... > > It's been a while since I looked at the protocol specs, but the client > usually maintains (implicit) state in this type of protocol, and could very > well indicate to the server that a push operation step is the first one (for > a pre-commit hook), last one (for a post-commit hook), or both, which could > then trigger the hooks immediately. Downsides: > > - needs a protocol change > - what do you do if the last step never arrives?
In term so f invoking the post hook, I think a timer would be needed. _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
