On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 03:48:52PM -0700, Emily Shaffer wrote: > > Here you've done a custom munging of pre-push into prePush. I'm fine > > with that, but would we ever want to allow third-party scripts to define > > their own hooks using this mechanism? E.g., if there's a git-hooks > > command could I run "git hooks run foo" to run the foo hook? If so, then > > it might be simpler to just use the name as-is rather than defining the > > exact munging rules. > > I did envision that kind of thing, or at very least something like > `git hook --list --porcelain foo | xargs -n 1 sh -c`. When I saw > Jonathan's suggestion I wondered if using the hookname as is (pre-push) > was not idiomatic to the config, and maybe I should change it. But I > would rather leave it identical to the hookname, personally. You do still have to communicate to users of git-hook that their hook names are limited to the characters used in config keys. But that seems simpler to me than describing any special dash-and-capitalization conversion. -Peff
