On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 08:02:46PM +0200, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: > On my road of trying to adopt Monotone for use in my various larger > Open Source projects like OSSP, OpenPKG, etc I've last week worked on > an important issue (at least for me) which perhaps looks strange to the > "maximum distribution is everything which matters" guys in the VCS camp: > > How to best combine the developer-requested distributed VCS nature > of Monotone with the central ACL nature required at the "master" > repository of those projects? > > To get you an impression how "deep" the problem is we try to solve > here: we want that the developers can use full distributed VCS outside > the central repository. Nevertheless, they have to fulfill a mandatory > contributor agreement (to protect the licensing, etc) which especially > means they are allowed to propagate/merge/pluck only revisions within > a particular branch tree (e.g. "openpkg.*") and inside this tree only > developers who have signed the contributor agreement are allowed > to commit their stuff. As long as a developer is fulfilling these > constraints he will be able to share his revisions (which indirectly > usually carry the revisions of others due to merging) with the master > repository (from which official release tarballs and packages are > rolled). If he breaks out of these constraints, he is _forced_ to stay > out at all.
Hello, I find such server-side policy very interesting. Can you also restrict all revisions accepted by the server to those branches (e.g. openpkg.*) by mandating that all revisions accepted via netsync have this branch cert? Pavel _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
