On Jul 14, 2012, at 11:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Wincent Colaiuta <win@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Jul 14, 2012, at 10:25 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>> I did not see anything wrong doing what you described in the >>> post-receive, even though having the hook in the "scratch" felt >>> strange, as the "copying from authoritative" would also want to be >>> automated and the natural triggering mechanism to do so would be a >>> post-receive there. What issues were you worried about? >> >> The part that I left out, to keep things simple, is that ... > > I said "strange", not "wrong". If it is undesirable to hook the > "authoritative" repository, it is perfectly fine to hook on the > receiving end. > > So what issues were you worried about? I guess I was just a little worried about using filter-branch in a completely automated context (I have used it previously, but always in a manual fashion to do explicit "surgery" on the history), so I really just wanted a sanity check. Thanks for your input; it's much appreciated. We have a strict fast-forward-only policy on our master branch, so I think the hook will be quite simple to write and won't require us to handle any crazy edge cases. Cheers, Wincent -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html