| Message ID | 20240712224748.56843-1-jltobler@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | doc: clarify post-receive hook behavior | expand |
Justin Tobler <jltobler@gmail.com> writes: > The `githooks` documentation mentions that the post-receive hook > executes once after git-receive-pack(1) updates all references and that > it also receives the same information as the pre-receive hook on > standard input. This is misleading though because the hook only > executes once if at least one of the attempted reference updates is > successful. Also, while each line provided on standard input is in the > same format as the pre-receive hook, the information received only > includes the set of references that were successfully updated. Yup, it sounds like is a sensible design that gives the most useful information to the hook. > diff --git a/Documentation/githooks.txt b/Documentation/githooks.txt > index 06e997131b..f9eb396a79 100644 > --- a/Documentation/githooks.txt > +++ b/Documentation/githooks.txt > @@ -415,13 +415,13 @@ post-receive > > This hook is invoked by linkgit:git-receive-pack[1] when it reacts to > `git push` and updates reference(s) in its repository. > -It executes on the remote repository once after all the refs have > -been updated. > +It executes on the remote repository once if any of the attempted ref > +updates are successful. We could instead say "at least one of", but "any of" should be fine. OK. > -This hook executes once for the receive operation. > +For a receive operation, this hook executes a single time at most. Hmph, maybe we can strike this sentence as we already said "once" in the previous paragraph. The intention of the original description that said "only after" was to convey two things: (1) it runs only once, and (2) it does not run before all the ref-update requests have been processed (either successfully or unsuccessfully). If the "only after" was not serving the original purpose of conveying both of the two, then perhaps we should remove the word "once" from the previous paragraph instead and keep this sentence. My preference is revert your "once after" -> "once if" to get back to the original "once after", and then remove "this hook executes once for the receive operaiton" of the original, without adding your "For a receieve ... at most". The hook executes on the remote repository once after all the proposed ref updates are processed and if at least one ref is updated as the result. > -It takes no > -arguments, but gets the same information as the > -<<pre-receive,'pre-receive'>> > -hook does on its standard input. > -It > +takes no arguments, but for each ref successfully updated, it receives a > +line on standard input that follows the same format as the > +<<pre-receive,'pre-receive'>> hook. This part of the update is great. The "but" there is annoying, but that badness was inherited from the original and not a fault of this patch. If I were writing it from scratch I would probably have said something like: The hook takes no arguments. It receives one line on standard input for each ref that is successfully updated in the same format as the pre-receive hook. Thanks.
On 24/07/12 04:11PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Justin Tobler <jltobler@gmail.com> writes: > > > -This hook executes once for the receive operation. > > +For a receive operation, this hook executes a single time at most. > > Hmph, maybe we can strike this sentence as we already said "once" in > the previous paragraph. The intention of the original description > that said "only after" was to convey two things: Ya, I competely agree that this is repetetive and should be removed. > > (1) it runs only once, and > (2) it does not run before all the ref-update requests have been > processed (either successfully or unsuccessfully). > > If the "only after" was not serving the original purpose of > conveying both of the two, then perhaps we should remove the word > "once" from the previous paragraph instead and keep this sentence. > > My preference is revert your "once after" -> "once if" to get back > to the original "once after", and then remove "this hook executes > once for the receive operaiton" of the original, without adding your > "For a receieve ... at most". > > The hook executes on the remote repository once after all the > proposed ref updates are processed and if at least one ref is > updated as the result. > Thanks for the suggestion. This more clearly conveys the two points mentioned. Will add in V2. > > -It takes no > > -arguments, but gets the same information as the > > -<<pre-receive,'pre-receive'>> > > -hook does on its standard input. > > -It > > +takes no arguments, but for each ref successfully updated, it receives a > > +line on standard input that follows the same format as the > > +<<pre-receive,'pre-receive'>> hook. > > This part of the update is great. The "but" there is annoying, but > that badness was inherited from the original and not a fault of this > patch. If I were writing it from scratch I would probably have said > something like: > > The hook takes no arguments. It receives one line on standard > input for each ref that is successfully updated in the same > format as the pre-receive hook. > I also agree that it is better to break out these two statements. Will adapt this for V2. Thanks again. -Justin
diff --git a/Documentation/githooks.txt b/Documentation/githooks.txt index 06e997131b..f9eb396a79 100644 --- a/Documentation/githooks.txt +++ b/Documentation/githooks.txt @@ -415,13 +415,13 @@ post-receive This hook is invoked by linkgit:git-receive-pack[1] when it reacts to `git push` and updates reference(s) in its repository. -It executes on the remote repository once after all the refs have -been updated. +It executes on the remote repository once if any of the attempted ref +updates are successful. -This hook executes once for the receive operation. It takes no -arguments, but gets the same information as the -<<pre-receive,'pre-receive'>> -hook does on its standard input. +For a receive operation, this hook executes a single time at most. It +takes no arguments, but for each ref successfully updated, it receives a +line on standard input that follows the same format as the +<<pre-receive,'pre-receive'>> hook. This hook does not affect the outcome of `git receive-pack`, as it is called after the real work is done. @@ -448,6 +448,9 @@ environment variables will not be set. If the client selects to use push options, but doesn't transmit any, the count variable will be set to zero, `GIT_PUSH_OPTION_COUNT=0`. +See the link:git-receive-pack.html#_post_receive_hook[post-receive hook] +section in linkgit:git-receive-pack[1] for additional details. + [[post-update]] post-update ~~~~~~~~~~~
The `githooks` documentation mentions that the post-receive hook executes once after git-receive-pack(1) updates all references and that it also receives the same information as the pre-receive hook on standard input. This is misleading though because the hook only executes once if at least one of the attempted reference updates is successful. Also, while each line provided on standard input is in the same format as the pre-receive hook, the information received only includes the set of references that were successfully updated. Update the documentation to clarify these points and also provide a reference to the post-receive hook section of the `git-receive-pack` documentation which has additional information. Signed-off-by: Justin Tobler <jltobler@gmail.com> --- Greetings all, I was recently looking into post-receive hooks and found some of its documentation[1] a bit misleading. With this patch, the `githooks` documentation is updated to better align with the hooks documentation for `git-receive-pack`[2]. Thanks for taking a look! -Justin 1: https://git-scm.com/docs/githooks#post-receive 2: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-receive-pack#_post_receive_hook --- Documentation/githooks.txt | 15 +++++++++------ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) base-commit: a7dae3bdc8b516d36f630b12bb01e853a667e0d9