Add pronto to pre_push hooks

[povilasjurcys]

Currently it's possible to add pronto only as PreCommit hook. This PR allows to add pronto as PrePush hook too.

[sds]

Thanks for the pull request @povilasjurcys.

Overall looks good, but I'm not clear on the need for protected.

[sds]

Can you explain why we're making this change when the previous private worked?

[povilasjurcys]

extract_messages is used in child classes.

private" means that only methods of this class can access the member. "protected" means that methods of this class, or of derived classes, can access the member.
source: https://answers.unity.com/questions/610093/what-is-the-difference-between-private-and-protect.html

Just wanted to handle this in more "correct" way. Ruby does dot handle private and protected very well anyways, but I personally use protected when I want to indicate that method might be overwritten in child class. Sadly, in practice you can do the same with private methods too.

Let me know if you prefer private more.

[sds]

You are referencing documentation for a language that is not Ruby. protected, in a nutshell, allows a method to be called by another instance of the same class or subclass. It is not necessary in this context.

From https://ruby-doc.org/core-2.5.3/Module.html#method-i-protected

If a method has protected visibility, it is callable only where self of the context is the same as the method. (method definition or instance_eval). This behavior is different from Java's protected method. Usually private should be used.

Emphasis mine.

[povilasjurcys]

thanks for pointing this out. You're right. private it is

[sds]

Why are we using protected? There isn't a situation where another instance is attempting to call this method, so private is the correct level of access control. If I'm misunderstanding your intent, let me know.

[povilasjurcys]

same answer as for https://github.com/sds/overcommit/pull/706/files#r386066591

[sds]

Thanks!