[ On Monday, October 28, 2002 at 13:44:50 (-0800), Shankar Unni wrote: ] > Subject: RE: Per-modules readers/writers ? > > This makes it hard for the repository administrator to put in a level of > access control without having to spend days or months running after the > other departments, and genuflecting in front of the change review > boards.
Version control is a part of software configuration and change management. I thought that (what you said) is what it (change management) was all about! ;-) > Other competitive source-code control systems have such informal > mechanisms in place that are trivial to administer, _for the person who > is responsible for maintaining the repository_, and it's generally in > response to overwhelming customer demand. I think you're still missing the point. CVS is a _very_ _simple_ version control tool that is built entirely upon RCS and it does very little on its own except make some repetitive tasks easier, and provides some hooks where various procedures can be integrated into these tasks. RCS uses normal Unix files and filesystem protections, providing only for directory level access control through the normal underlying filesystem access controls of who can read (and search in) a directory and who can write to that directory. There's no access control possible, not even theoretically, for any of the internal structure of an RCS file -- anyone who can write to the directory containing the file can change any content of the file. Those other "competitive" (*) source code control systems are either promising things they simply cannot possibly deliver securely, or they have fundamentally different underlying repository designs. (*) open source tools like CVS do not compete for market share and their developers and maintainers have very little incentive to provide features which "customers" demand if those same features are not also directly of use to the developers and maintainers, especially when such features demand a ground-up re-design of the whole thing. If you think some so-called "competitive" tool is better suited for your requirements then you really should use it instead of CVS -- CVS isn't meant to be the one tool that meets everyone's needs! Even if you paid someone (such as myself ;-) to re-design and develop a variant of CVS to make it do what you want it to there's no guarantee that it would replace CVS or even be embraced by other CVS users. -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 218-0098; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Planix, Inc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; VE3TCP; Secrets of the Weird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Info-cvs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs