Danil Shopyrin wrote: >> Do they? Perhaps they write them by trial-and-error, testing to see >> if they get the behaviour they want. In that case we will break authz >> files that work. > > Agree on this. From our experience, people configure access > permissions by trial-and-error approach. At least, they do not > consider the svnbook. >
I would agree that the documentation rather than the code should be updated. I experienced this error in the documentation when creating authz rules (as did others) and found something that worked correctly. Does anybody object if I create an issue in the documentation issue tracker? I'll create a patch to the English documentation to go with the issue. Mark Disclaimer: http://www.peralex.com/disclaimer.html
