Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> This means that we could do something like this:
>
> [hook "/path/to/executable.sh"]
> event = pre-commit
> order = 123
> mustSucceed = false
> parallelizable = true
>
> etc, etc as needed.
You can do
[hook "pre-commit"]
order = 123
path = "/path/to/executable.sh"
[hook "pre-commit"]
order = 234
path = "/path/to/another-executable.sh"
as well, and using the second level for what hook the (sub)section
is about, instead of "we have this path that is used for a hook.
What hook is it?", feels (at least to me) more natural.
> But I wonder if we also want to be able to do something like this:
>
> [hook "/etc/git-secrets/git-secrets"]
> event = pre-commit
> event = prepare-commit-msg
Once you start going this route, it no longer makes sense to give
priority (you called it "order") to a path and have that same number
used in contexts of different hooks. Your git-secrets script may
want to be called early among pre-commit hooks but late among the
prepare-commit-msg hooks, for example.
> I think, though, that something like
> hook.pre-commit."path/to/executable.sh" won't work.
That is why Peff already suggested in the TOPIC notes to use
"command" in the message you are responding to (I used "path" in the
above description).
