Dean Roehrich <Dean.Roehrich at sun.com> writes: > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 04:33:26PM -0400, James Carlson wrote: >> Do you need this in the short term, or can you wait a few months? If >> it's a short-term need, I don't think we'll be ready for you in time. > > I'll have a solution running on our internal server before the end of April. > > >> > An alternative is to use cascading repos; one for pulls, "P", and one for >> > pushes, "Q". Use pretxnchangegroup on P, and have P execute a changegroup >> > hook to push to Q. A prechangegroup hook on Q would ensure that only P can >> > push to it. >> >> Yes, having a push-only gate makes a lot of sense if you have to deal >> with the lack of read-side locking in Mercurial. I don't think we've >> looked at this issue for ON yet, though. > > I was thinking that if mercurial had a pre-pull hook that would fire whenever > it receives a pull/clone request then I could use that and a prechangegroup > hook to implement a locking mechanism. But that would lead us to the > situation you've described for the teamware ON gates.
You could do that, yes. And it would, but to a lesser degree. putback would block bringover, but not the reverse. I would expect that to be far less of a problem than bringover locking out putback (as with Teamware). -- Rich
