On Nov 14, 2007 12:55 PM, Kristis Makris <kristis.makris@xxxxxxx> wrote: > It isn't a centralized bug-tracking system necessarily. Because > different developers may used different, custom bug-tracking systems, > with custom hooks in their own local Git repositories that integrate > with only their own bug-tracking systems. And perhaps we can add the > support in the Scmbug Git frontend to integrate with a centralized > bug-tracker only on push operations if desired. I disagree somewhat here. In git, local commits are extremely lightweight, and as a developer I don't want anything remarkable to happen on those, even locally. It's pushing (which is actually publishing!) that makes those commits relevant. Even if I have a local or distributed bugtracker, any purely local commit is "draft". And this is regardless of centralised or distributed -- that's a matter of policy around the repo I'm pushing to. The distinction that matters is local vs published. Local commits get removed, rebased, redone, discarded a whole lot. > But we can't explore any of these issues, discussed in the thread below > too, unless we can extract what's needed from the hooks. I concur with the chorus that chants "HEAD"... try with `git show HEAD` for starters... cheers, martin - 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
