On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 03:27:12PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Johannes Sixt j...@kdbg.org writes:
I think this is a good move. Hooks are written by users, who sometimes
are not clueful enough.
Thanks for a sanity check. I do not think it is about cluefulness
in this particular case.
Johannes Sixt j...@kdbg.org writes:
I think this is a good move. Hooks are written by users, who sometimes
are not clueful enough.
Thanks for a sanity check. I do not think it is about cluefulness
in this particular case. A rule that is not meaningfully enforced
by reliably failing offenders
Johannes Sixt j...@kdbg.org writes:
I think this is a good move. Hooks are written by users, who sometimes
are not clueful enough.
But what do our writers do when they fail with EPIPE? Die? If so, this
patch alone is not sufficient.
I think it is in a loop
while (...) {
Am 13.09.2014 um 00:48 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
The pre-receive and post-receive hooks were designed to be an
improvement over old style update and post-update hooks that used to
take the update information on the command line and were limited by
the command line length limit. They take the
The pre-receive and post-receive hooks were designed to be an
improvement over old style update and post-update hooks that used to
take the update information on the command line and were limited by
the command line length limit. They take the same information from
their standard input. It has
5 matches
Mail list logo