[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Infrastructure job...



On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 01:04:39PM -0700, law redhat com wrote:
> In message <20031030142945 E8407 devserv devel redhat com>, "Michael K. Johnson
> " writes:
>  >One of the things that I'd like to have before doing that is a
>  >CVS ACL implementation that allows us to put ACLS on branches.
>  >The one we use internally allows us to lock down a repository
>  >to certain developers, but I'd really like, for example, to allow
>  >package developers to lock down CVS HEAD on their packages but
>  >still let other developers do work on a branch, and then the
>  >main developer(s) for that package merge the work down to CVS
>  >HEAD when they think it's appropriate.
>  >
>  >Anyone interested in working on that?
>
> There's actually a couple projects which are providing ACLs for CVS.
> 
> http://cvsacl.sourceforge.net/
> http://cvs-nserver.sourceforge.net/
> 
> I don't know which is more mature or whether or not either is working with
> the main CVS folks to ensure integration.  But they're probably worth looking
> into.

Well, at least the one we use now just hooks into the commitinfo
hook, so no explicit integration is necessary.  I think that adding
per-branch acls to the script we have probably wouldn't be too hard
for a perl programmer.  What we have is 101 lines of perl, including
comments.

If we want to control reading as well as writing, we'd need more
direct integration, such as the two patches above.  Dealing with
security issues that might be worthwhile, but there are other
ways to do that.

michaelkjohnson

 "He that composes himself is wiser than he that composes a book."
 Linux Application Development                     -- Ben Franklin
 http://people.redhat.com/johnsonm/lad/




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]