James Westby wrote: > On Thu Nov 19 22:15:02 -0600 2009 Michael Hudson wrote: >> Recipes would definitely have an owner for access control. Whether that >> would be part of the URL/namespace is a separate decision. > > I was thinking of a parallel with branches, but you are better > placed to know what will work well.
Not really! >> Hm. At least making the manifest doesn't require running arbitrary code :-) > > Now you say this, I need to look again. The 0.2 format supports arbitrary > code execution, but I'm not sure how it interacts with manifest creation. Heh. > Also, there has been some discussion of handling private branches. After > some discussions yesterday it is now clear that this is important for > Canonical, as well as supporting private recipes. Sure, that's not a surprise. But not in the first rollout please :) Cheers, mwh _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
