Ship sample hooks with .sample suffix

We used to mark hooks we ship as samples by making them unexecutable, but
some filesystems cannot tell what is executable and what is not.

This makes it much more explicit.  The hooks are suffixed with .sample
(but now are made executable), so enabling it is still one step operation
(instead of "chmod +x $hook", you would do "mv $hook.sample $hook") but
now they won't get accidentally enabled on systems without executable bit.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

1 files changed, 0 insertions, 169 deletions

diff --git a/templates/hooks--pre-rebase b/templates/hooks--pre-rebase
deleted file mode 100644
index be1b06e25..000000000
--- a/templates/hooks--pre-rebase
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,169 +0,0 @@
-#!/bin/sh
-#
-# Copyright (c) 2006, 2008 Junio C Hamano
-#
-# The "pre-rebase" hook is run just before "git-rebase" starts doing
-# its job, and can prevent the command from running by exiting with
-# non-zero status.
-#
-# The hook is called with the following parameters:
-#
-# $1 -- the upstream the series was forked from.
-# $2 -- the branch being rebased (or empty when rebasing the current branch).
-#
-# This sample shows how to prevent topic branches that are already
-# merged to 'next' branch from getting rebased, because allowing it
-# would result in rebasing already published history.
-
-publish=next
-basebranch="$1"
-if test "$#" = 2
-then
-	topic="refs/heads/$2"
-else
-	topic=`git symbolic-ref HEAD` ||
-	exit 0 ;# we do not interrupt rebasing detached HEAD
-fi
-
-case "$topic" in
-refs/heads/??/*)
-	;;
-*)
-	exit 0 ;# we do not interrupt others.
-	;;
-esac
-
-# Now we are dealing with a topic branch being rebased
-# on top of master.  Is it OK to rebase it?
-
-# Does the topic really exist?
-git show-ref -q "$topic" || {
-	echo >&2 "No such branch $topic"
-	exit 1
-}
-
-# Is topic fully merged to master?
-not_in_master=`git-rev-list --pretty=oneline ^master "$topic"`
-if test -z "$not_in_master"
-then
-	echo >&2 "$topic is fully merged to master; better remove it."
-	exit 1 ;# we could allow it, but there is no point.
-fi
-
-# Is topic ever merged to next?  If so you should not be rebasing it.
-only_next_1=`git-rev-list ^master "^$topic" ${publish} | sort`
-only_next_2=`git-rev-list ^master           ${publish} | sort`
-if test "$only_next_1" = "$only_next_2"
-then
-	not_in_topic=`git-rev-list "^$topic" master`
-	if test -z "$not_in_topic"
-	then
-		echo >&2 "$topic is already up-to-date with master"
-		exit 1 ;# we could allow it, but there is no point.
-	else
-		exit 0
-	fi
-else
-	not_in_next=`git-rev-list --pretty=oneline ^${publish} "$topic"`
-	perl -e '
-		my $topic = $ARGV[0];
-		my $msg = "* $topic has commits already merged to public branch:\n";
-		my (%not_in_next) = map {
-			/^([0-9a-f]+) /;
-			($1 => 1);
-		} split(/\n/, $ARGV[1]);
-		for my $elem (map {
-				/^([0-9a-f]+) (.*)$/;
-				[$1 => $2];
-			} split(/\n/, $ARGV[2])) {
-			if (!exists $not_in_next{$elem->[0]}) {
-				if ($msg) {
-					print STDERR $msg;
-					undef $msg;
-				}
-				print STDERR " $elem->[1]\n";
-			}
-		}
-	' "$topic" "$not_in_next" "$not_in_master"
-	exit 1
-fi
-
-exit 0
-
-################################################################
-
-This sample hook safeguards topic branches that have been
-published from being rewound.
-
-The workflow assumed here is:
-
- * Once a topic branch forks from "master", "master" is never
-   merged into it again (either directly or indirectly).
-
- * Once a topic branch is fully cooked and merged into "master",
-   it is deleted.  If you need to build on top of it to correct
-   earlier mistakes, a new topic branch is created by forking at
-   the tip of the "master".  This is not strictly necessary, but
-   it makes it easier to keep your history simple.
-
- * Whenever you need to test or publish your changes to topic
-   branches, merge them into "next" branch.
-
-The script, being an example, hardcodes the publish branch name
-to be "next", but it is trivial to make it configurable via
-$GIT_DIR/config mechanism.
-
-With this workflow, you would want to know:
-
-(1) ... if a topic branch has ever been merged to "next".  Young
-    topic branches can have stupid mistakes you would rather
-    clean up before publishing, and things that have not been
-    merged into other branches can be easily rebased without
-    affecting other people.  But once it is published, you would
-    not want to rewind it.
-
-(2) ... if a topic branch has been fully merged to "master".
-    Then you can delete it.  More importantly, you should not
-    build on top of it -- other people may already want to
-    change things related to the topic as patches against your
-    "master", so if you need further changes, it is better to
-    fork the topic (perhaps with the same name) afresh from the
-    tip of "master".
-
-Let's look at this example:
-
-		   o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o "next"
-		  /       /           /           /
-		 /   a---a---b A     /           /
-		/   /               /           /
-	       /   /   c---c---c---c B         /
-	      /   /   /             \         /
-	     /   /   /   b---b C     \       /
-	    /   /   /   /             \     /
-    ---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o---o "master"
-
-
-A, B and C are topic branches.
-
- * A has one fix since it was merged up to "next".
-
- * B has finished.  It has been fully merged up to "master" and "next",
-   and is ready to be deleted.
-
- * C has not merged to "next" at all.
-
-We would want to allow C to be rebased, refuse A, and encourage
-B to be deleted.
-
-To compute (1):
-
-	git-rev-list ^master ^topic next
-	git-rev-list ^master        next
-
-	if these match, topic has not merged in next at all.
-
-To compute (2):
-
-	git-rev-list master..topic
-
-	if this is empty, it is fully merged to "master".