Re: [fossil-users] limited ticketing
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote:
if {$login eq $submitter} {
things that only the submitter is allowed to do
}
You could do similar with an assignedto field, as well.
Yes, but... then the JSON API would also have to support th1, which it
doesn't (and isn't planned), or users could simply use the json api to get
around this restriction.
--
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] limited ticketing
On Nov 18, 2011, at 3:41 AM, Tomek Kott wrote: If we have granular permissions for tickets, then we should probably also have it for the wiki (view attachments, view history), we should also separate attach and delete for wiki and tickets, and maybe even throw in permissions related to the timeline and files (such as view newest view hitsory, view patch, view diff) and maybe even download zip instead of tar file. Don't forget about tags and even open and closed names. You could EVEN create permissions for each artifact! That would just be easier, because you wouldn't need to worry about the type. OR We could realize that to do this properly would require a good CMS, which fossil is not, and keep it simple. You know that by similar funny implications we can prove that most of Fossil is actually redundant... Actually, why do we even have a permission system, if Fossil is an internal development tool? Kind regards, Remigiusz Modrzejewski ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] limited ticketing
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote:
if {$login eq $submitter} {
things that only the submitter is allowed to do
}
You could do similar with an assignedto field, as well.
Yes, but... then the JSON API would also have to support th1, which it
doesn't (and isn't planned), or users could simply use the json api to get
around this restriction.
In most work environments, I would not expect users outside of the
software team to be knowledgeble enough to use a JSON based front
end not served by either Fossil or another company server.
However, is there at least a compile option to disable JSON?
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] limited ticketing
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Remigiusz Modrzejewski l...@maxnet.org.pl wrote: You know that by similar funny implications we can prove that most of Fossil is actually redundant... Actually, why do we even have a permission system, if Fossil is an internal development tool? Last I looked, the Fossile website is both public facing and hosted on Fosile itself. But even in a closed environment, there are people outside the software team that have legitimate need to view/edit tickets. Fossil's web-based UI can serve this need (and does in my office). ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] limited ticketing
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote: In most work environments, I would not expect users outside of the software team to be knowledgeble enough to use a JSON based front end not served by either Fossil or another company server. Yes, but security via obfuscation isn't all that secure ;). However, is there at least a compile option to disable JSON? Indeed, it's the other way around: you need to configure with --enable-json to enable it. -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] limited ticketing
We are not using the limitations the original request suggested, though I did put in some TH1 code for the purpose of encouraging following the process flow. This was mostly to make the non-software people more comfortable. (Fossil's ticket system is quite good. The only people I personaly know who don't like it are the ones who worship process.) As an aside, whether TH1, TCL or external program via hooks, I think support for server-side scripting is a good thing to have even in a simple SCM like Fossil. I am hoping I will have some time, soon, to see what I might be able to contribute (beyond the small bits of TH1 code I've posted to this list). On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Ron Wilson ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote: In most work environments, I would not expect users outside of the software team to be knowledgeble enough to use a JSON based front end not served by either Fossil or another company server. Yes, but security via obfuscation isn't all that secure ;). ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
