On Wednesday 12 May 2010 08:13:39 Esben Mose Hansen wrote: > On Tuesday 11 May 2010 21:29:47 Jeff Mitchell wrote: > > This all said, we discussed a few alternatives in #kde-git and I was > > asked to put them on this list for discussion: > > I know this is probably a stupid question, but since I can't see the > answer, perhaps other can't either. As far as I can see, we need > > 1. Actual git repositories > 2. User access controls > 3. Merge requests/reviewboard > 4. A bug tracking system > > How about the really simple solution of git + ssh + unix groups,
Correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that using unix groups for access control with git would be to coarse-grained to accurately model the existing ACLs. My understanding is that UNIX permissions can only restrict access to whole repositories and not specific files or trees under those repositories. If that's the case, it presented problems on the front-end (we'd have to split the repository to match the ACLs) and on the bank-end (if I new ACL is required, we have to split an existing repository that is in active use.) > and > patching reviewboard to support git, while keeping bugzilla as is? I don't see any reason bug-handling is required to change at the same time as a git migration. Reviewboard does need nominal git support. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. [email protected] ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
