Re: [Gnu-arch-users] self-contained changesets?

[Jan Hudec]

On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 13:30:51 -0700, Tupshin Harper wrote:
> Tom Lord wrote:
> 
> >   > From: Joshua Haberman <address@hidden>
> >
> >   > Arch seems to require that anyone who wants to make their personal
> >   > changes available to the world have access to a publically available
> >   > server to host their personal archive.  Is this a safe assumption?
> >
> >Mostly I think it is -- but that doesn't mean that it isn't worth
> >providing support for when the assumption is false.   It's also not
> >quite the case that arch requires that -- although the ways in which
> >it doesn't require it should probably be made more featureful.
> >
> >Would you agree that email and netnews provide the other two most
> >obvious transports?
> > 
> >
> Mail, certainly; netnews possibly. But don't overlook the convenience 
> factor of making it easy for one person (maybe the project lead) to host 
> archives/branches for other people, and giving only those people write 
> access to their archives. Since arch doesn't have its own server and 
> uses other mechanisms (webdav, sftp, etc), this is not strictly an arch 
> issue. But howtos and prefab setup scripts for configuring a server to 
> be either a primary archive or a mirror archive for a remote user would 
> help alleviate this issue.

Probably the easiest solution would be to have a restricted sftp server
with a limit on a per-key basis. Limiting ssh keys to run only specific
command works nicely. So the restricted sftp server remains. Does it not
exist somewhere yet?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec 
<address@hidden>