On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 09:42:11PM -0500, Corey Minyard wrote:
> Have you looked at my patch, at http://home.attbi.com/~minyard/? It's
> been around for a while and is well tested, and implements full ACLs
> (per directory, per file, and per branch) within CVS, and has a lot of
> users.
>
well I wasn't aware of it before I started coding, but yeah I looked at it, it looked
a
little bit more complicated/'batched up' than I wanted (ie: you've got other changes
that don't relate to acl.) Also I wanted something simple, wasn't sure how easy to use
your solution was.
Anyways, I'm not against your patches (ie: if they are the standard acl for cvs, I'd be
more than happy to use them), but I had a couple of questions:
1) is your acl mechanism backwards compatible with existing cvs
clients/servers?
2) how do you use your acl?
#1 is key for me - I need something where I don't need to download a new client for
everyone who wants to use ACL. #2 is pretty important too - I want something
centralized,
one file that I can check and see at a glance who has access to what. If #1 and #2
holds
for your patch, then like I said I'd be more than happy to use it.
Ed
_______________________________________________
Info-cvs mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/info-cvs
