On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:36:13AM +0200, Mark Cammidge wrote: > 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.
OK then. > 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. Please go ahead and file an issue. Thanks! > Disclaimer: http://www.peralex.com/disclaimer.html This is so much nicer than putting the boilerplate into email directly. I wish more companies feeling they have to have the boilerplate would follow your example! Stefan
