On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 7:23 AM brian m. carlson <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This series introduces multiple hook support. > > I've thought a lot about the discussion over whether this series should > use the configuration as the source for multiple hooks. Ultimately, I've > come to the decision that it's not a good idea. Even adopting the empty > entry as a reset marker, the fact that inheritance in the configuration > is in-order and can't be easily modified means that it's not likely to > be very useful, but it is likely to be quite surprising for the average > user. Can we just do like we do with hooks-in-directory? Ignore the config variable order. Sort them all alphabetically. The user then has to prefix a number or something to control order. Easier transition from hooks-in-dir to hooks-in-config too. > I think a solution that sticks with the existing model and builds > off a design used by other systems people are familiar with, like cron > and run-parts, is going to be a better choice. Moreover, this is the > design that people have already built with outside tooling, which is a > further argument in favor of it. -- Duy
