Revert "Add support in gclient for pre-DEPS hooks"

Revert "Add support in gclient for pre-DEPS hooks"

This reverts commit 2d1ee9ec79f05eb1f9cf448fe2cf0b49b7f73658.

We can add this functionality back if we decide we want it, but for now it's
sitting around unused.

BUG=

[iannucci, 2013-11-11 20:10:32]

On 2013/11/11 14:51:57, borenet wrote:

lgtm :/

[iannucci, 2013-11-11 20:10:57]

On 2013/11/11 20:10:32, iannucci wrote:
> On 2013/11/11 14:51:57, borenet wrote:
> 
> lgtm :/

(though on the other hand, unused functionality can end up biting you in the
butt later :).

[borenet, 2013-11-11 20:15:20]

On 2013/11/11 20:10:57, iannucci wrote:
> On 2013/11/11 20:10:32, iannucci wrote:
> > On 2013/11/11 14:51:57, borenet wrote:
> > 
> > lgtm :/
> 
> (though on the other hand, unused functionality can end up biting you in the
> butt later :).

Agreed.  I think that, if this isn't the way we're going to go forward on the
Skia/Git/DEPS change, and nobody else has an immediate need for this, there's no
reason to keep it around.  It can always be revived from the historical commit.

[borenet, 2013-11-12 18:52:36]

On 2013/11/11 20:15:20, borenet wrote:
> On 2013/11/11 20:10:57, iannucci wrote:
> > On 2013/11/11 20:10:32, iannucci wrote:
> > > On 2013/11/11 14:51:57, borenet wrote:
> > > 
> > > lgtm :/
> > 
> > (though on the other hand, unused functionality can end up biting you in the
> > butt later :).
> 
> Agreed.  I think that, if this isn't the way we're going to go forward on the
> Skia/Git/DEPS change, and nobody else has an immediate need for this, there's
no
> reason to keep it around.  It can always be revived from the historical
commit.

When the original CL was committed, we carefully rolled out to a couple of bots
at a time to avoid any disasters.  Should we do the same for the revert?

[cmp, 2013-11-12 19:10:04]

On 2013/11/12 18:52:36, borenet wrote:
> When the original CL was committed, we carefully rolled out to a couple of
bots
> at a time to avoid any disasters.  Should we do the same for the revert?

Yes. :)

[borenet, 2013-11-26 16:06:00]

On 2013/11/12 19:10:04, cmp wrote:
> On 2013/11/12 18:52:36, borenet wrote:
> > When the original CL was committed, we carefully rolled out to a couple of
> bots
> > at a time to avoid any disasters.  Should we do the same for the revert?
> 
> Yes. :)

I'm ready to push this through whenever it's convenient for chrome-infra.

[M-A Ruel, 2013-11-26 16:06:43]

lgtm

[cmp, 2013-11-26 23:50:04]

+mmoss who is current trooper