Email subjects are prefixed with "[SCM] " by default, make this optionally
configurable through the hooks.emailprefix config option.
Suggested by martin f krafft through
http://bugs.debian.org/428418
Signed-off-by: Gerrit Pape <pape@smarden.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* maint:
Yet more 1.5.3.5 fixes mentioned in release notes
cvsserver: Use exit 1 instead of die when req_Root fails.
git-blame shouldn't crash if run in an unmerged tree
git-config: print error message if the config file cannot be read
fixing output of non-fast-forward output of post-receive-email
post-receive-email has one place where the variable fast_forward is not
spelled correctly. At the same place the logic was reversed. The
combination of both bugs made the script work correctly for fast-forward
commits but not for non-fast-forward ones. This change fixes this to
be correct in both cases.
Signed-off-by: Robert Schiele <rschiele@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Have the error message for missing recipients actually report the
missing config variable and not a fictional one.
Signed-off-by: Lars Hjemli <hjemli@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
* maint:
Whip post 1.5.3.3 maintenance series into shape.
git stash: document apply's --index switch
post-receive-hook: Remove the From field from the generated email header so that the pusher's name is used
Using the name of the committer of the revision at the tip of the
updated ref is not sensible. That information is available in the email
itself should it be wanted, and by supplying a "From", we were
effectively hiding the person who performed the push - which is useful
information in itself.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* maint:
Do not over-quote the -f envelopesender value.
unexpected Make output (e.g. from --debug) causes build failure
Fixed minor typo in t/t9001-send-email.sh test command line.
Without this, the value passed to sendmail would have an extra set of
single quotes. At least exim's sendmail emulation would object to that:
exim: bad -f address "'list-addr@example.org'": malformed address: ' \
may not follow 'list-addr@example.org
error: hooks/post-receive exited with error code 1
Signed-off-by: Jim Meyering <jim@meyering.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Usage info is emebed in the script, but the gist of it is to run the script
from a pre-commit hook to save permissions/ownership data to a file and check
that file into the repository. Then, a post_merge hook reads the file and
updates working tree permissions/ownership. All updates are transparent to
the user (although there is a --verbose option). Merge conflicts are handled
in the "read" phase (in pre-commit), and the script aborts the commit and
tells you how to fix things in the case of a merge conflict in the metadata
file. This same idea could be extended to handle file ACLs or other file
metadata if desired.
Signed-off-by: Josh England <jjengla@sandia.gov>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We have to load a tree difference for the purpose of testing
file patterns. But if our branch is being created and there is no
specific base to difference against in the rule our base will be
'0'x40. This is (usually) not a valid tree-ish object in a Git
repository, so there's nothing to difference against.
Instead of creating the empty tree and running git-diff against
that we just take the output of `ls-tree -r --name-only` and mark
every returned pathname as an add.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In some applications of the update hook a user may be allowed to
modify a branch, but only if the file level difference is also an
allowed change. This is the commonly requested feature of allowing
users to modify only certain files.
A new repository.*.allow syntax permits granting the three basic
file level operations:
A: file is added relative to the other tree
M: file exists in both trees, but its SHA-1 or mode differs
D: file is removed relative to the other tree
on a per-branch and path-name basis. The user must also have a
branch level allow line already granting them access to create,
rewind or update (CRU) that branch before the hook will consult
any file level rules.
In order for a branch change to succeed _all_ files that differ
relative to some base (by default the old value of this branch,
but it can also be any valid tree-ish) must be allowed by file
level allow rules. A push is rejected if any diff exists that
is not covered by at least one allow rule.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In some applications of this paranoid update hook the set of ACL
rules that need to be applied to a user can be large, and the
number of users that those rules must also be applied to can be
more than a handful of individuals. Rather than repeating the same
rules multiple times (once for each user) we now allow users to be
members of groups, where the group supplies the list of ACL rules.
For various reasons we don't depend on the underlying OS groups
and instead perform our own group handling.
Users can be made a member of one or more groups by setting the
user.memberOf property within the "users/$who.acl" file:
[user]
memberOf = developer
memberOf = administrator
This will cause the hook to also parse the "groups/$groupname.acl"
file for each value of user.memberOf, and merge any allow rules
that match the current repository with the user's own private rules
(if they had any).
Since some rules are basically the same but may have a component
differ based on the individual user, any user.* key may be inserted
into a rule using the "${user.foo}" syntax. The allow rule does
not match if the user does not define one (and exactly one) value
for the key "foo".
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This uses "git-apply --whitespace=strip" to fix whitespace errors that have
crept in to our source files over time. There are a few files that need
to have trailing whitespaces (most notably, test vectors). The results
still passes the test, and build result in Documentation/ area is unchanged.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The sed command that extracted the first line of the project description
didn't include the -n switch and hence the project name was being
printed twice. This was ruining the email header generation because it
was assumed that the description was only one line and was included in
the subject. This turned the subject into a two line item and
prematurely finished the header.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Sometimes a non-fast-forward update doesn't add new commits, it merely
removes old commits. This patch adds support for detecting that and
outputting a more correct message.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
I'm using a variant of this update hook in a corporate environment
where we perform some validations of the commits and tags that
are being pushed. The model is a "central repository" type setup,
where users are given access to push to specific branches within
the shared central repository. In this particular installation we
run a specially patched git-receive-pack in setuid mode via SSH,
allowing all writes into the repository as the repository owner,
but only if this hook blesses it.
One of the major checks we perform with this hook is that the
'committer' line of a commit, or the 'tagger' line of a new annotated
tag actually correlates to the UNIX user who is performing the push.
Users can falsify these lines on their local repositories, but
the central repository that management trusts will reject all such
forgery attempts. Of course 'author' lines are still allowed to
be any value, as sometimes changes do come from other individuals.
Another nice feature of this hook is the access control lists for
all repositories on the system can also be stored and tracked in
a supporting Git repository, which can also be access controlled
by itself. This allows full auditing of who-had-what-when-and-why,
thanks to git-blame's data mining capabilities.
Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
The update hook is no longer the correct place to generate emails; there
is now the hooks/post-receive script which is run automatically after a
ref has been updated.
This patch is to make use of that new location, and to address some
faults in the old update hook.
The primary problem in the conversion was that in the update hook, the
ref has not actually been changed, but is about to be. In the
post-receive hook the ref has already been updated. That meant that
where we previously had lines like:
git rev-list --not --all
would now give the wrong list because "--all" in the post-receive hook
includes the ref that we are making the email for. This made it more
difficult to show only the new revisions added by this update.
The solution is not pretty; however it does work and doesn't need any
changes to git-rev-list itself. It also fixes (more accurately: reduces
the likelihood of) a nasty race when another update occurs while this
script is running. The solution, in short, looks like this (see the
source code for a longer explanation)
git rev-parse --not --all | grep -v $(git rev-parse $refname) |
git rev-list --pretty --stdin $oldrev..$newrev
This uses git-rev-parse followed by grep to filter out the revision of
the ref in question before it gets to rev-list and inhibits the output
of itself. By using $(git rev-parse $revname) rather than $newrev as the
filter, it also takes care of the situation where another update to the
same ref has been made since $refname was $newrev.
The second problem that is addressed is that of tags inhibiting the
correct output of an update email. Consider this, with somebranch and
sometag pointing at the same revision:
git push origin somebranch
git push origin sometag
That would work fine; the push of the branch would generate an email
containing all the new commits introduced by the update, then the push
of the tag would generate the shortlog formatted tag email. Now
consider:
git push origin sometag
git push origin somebranch
When some branch comes to run its "--not --all" line, it will find
sometag, and filter those commits from the email - leaving nothing.
That meant that those commits would not show (in full) on any email.
The fix is to not use "--all", and instead use "--branches" in the
git-rev-parse command.
Other changes
* Lose the monstrous one-giant-script layout and put things in easy to
digest functions. This makes it much easier to find the place you
need to change if you wanted to customise the output. I've also
tried to write more verbose comments for the same reason. The hook
script is big, mainly because of all the different cases that it has
to handle, so being easy to navigate is important.
* All uses of "git-command" changed to "git command", to cope better
if a user decided not to install all the hard links to git;
* Cleaned up some of the English in the email
* The fact that the receive hook makes the ref available also allows me
to use Shawn Pearce's fantastic suggestion that an annotated tag can
be parsed with git-for-each-ref. This removes the potentially
non-portable use of "<<<" heredocs and the nasty messing around with
"date" to convert numbers of seconds UTC to a real date
* Deletions are now caught and notified (briefly)
* To help with debugging, I've retained the command line mode from the
update hook; but made it so that the output is not emailed, it's just
printed to the screen. This could then be redirected if the user
wanted
* Removed the "Hello" from the beginning of the email - it's just
noise, and no one seriously has their day made happier by "friendly"
programs
* The fact that it doesn't rely on repository state as an indicator any
more means that it's far more stable in its output; hopefully the
same arguments will always generate the same email - even if the
repository changes in the future. This means you can easily recreate
an email should you want to.
* Included Jim Meyering's envelope sender option for the sendmail call
* The hook is now so big that it was inappropriate to copy it
to every repository by keeping it in the templates directory.
Instead, I've put a comment saying to look in contrib/hooks, and
given an example of calling the script from that template hook. The
advantage of calling the script residing at some fixed location is
that if a future package of git included a bug fixed version of the
script, that would be picked up automatically, and the user would not
have to notice and manually copy the new hook to every repository
that uses it.
Signed-off-by: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
