On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 10:20:32AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > >> The rationale for keeping the actual options inside a file instead of > >> putting them directly into an environment variable has multiple reasons: > > > > Thanks for including this rationale; my first thought on seeing the > > patch was "wouldn't this be much more convenient for a hook if each > > value had its own environment variable?". > > That's what I thought as well. Office discussion ensued and I am still > offended by this solution, but it sucks less than multiple environment variables > (I tried writing a script to construct and evaluate the environment > variables and > that doesn't look nice) If you give up on having multiple incarnations of each variable, then I think: GIT_PUSH_VAR_foo=value_for_foo GIT_PUSH_VAR_bar=value_for_bar is quite elegant, and easy to use from hooks. It just cannot represent multiple such "foo" variables. > If we did not have a GIT_PUSH_OPTIONS_COUNT and GIT_PUSH_OPTION_<N> > but rather GIT_PUSH_OPTIONS_VARIABLES that contains the other variables, > it may be easier to handle, but whether you read from a file or evaluate the > environment variable is only a minor step, the indirection is there anyway > and this would be very close to what we have above. It makes the server implementation a bit uglier. You have to create the temporary file, and you have to clean it up. What process is responsible for cleaning up stale files? Obviously receive-pack would try to clean up after itself, but what happens when it is "kill -9"'d, or the system goes down, etc? We clean up stale tmp files like tmp_obj_* in git-gc; I think we'd want something like that here. -Peff -- 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