First customer pain point pull request - default-hook

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Nate Finch <nate.finch at canonical.com> wrote:
> I think to answer most of these questions, we need more information about
> what the existing charms do, and input from the charmers themselves.
>
> Here's the info from Marco: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/8100649/

Thanks. Looking at some entries from that list I can definitely see
how single-hook would be useful, and it looks like it would also work
well with the defined semantics.

> Numbers:
>
> 56/162 charms use symlinks
> 6 of those are only partially symlinked
> 50 of those use symlinks for all hooks

Given those numbers, and the pattern described above, I'd definitely
try to have the enforced single hook model you described last, which
must be explicitly enabled to work, and where everything is run only
through it when it is indeed enabled. Easier to implement, and to
understand as well.

Addressing Aaron's remark, the hook might be called "dispatch" so it
that conveys the intended semantics rather than its uniqueness, and
the metadata flag "dispatch-hook: <bool>".


gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net