Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > Hrm, this is going to have nasty conflicts with 'next', which already > does the remote ref matching. I think the best way to implement this > would probably be on top of the jk/send-pack topic in next, and add a > new REF_STATUS_REMOTE_CHANGED status type. I think Jeff is referring to sp/refspec-match (605b4978). I still have doubts about having this in the update hook, as the hook is about accepting or refusing and has never been about rewriting. If the implementation of the svn hook were to check if you can rebase cleanly in the update hook without actually rewriting the refs, and then to perform the real update of the refs in post-receive or post-update hook, that would feel much cleaner. But the end result would be the same as you rewrote the refs inside the update hook like your patch does, so maybe I am worrying about conceptual cleanliness too much, needlessly. - 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
