gnu-arch-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] sharing local archive problems


From: Andrei A. Voropaev
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] sharing local archive problems
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:36:10 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 10:18:19AM -0400, James Blackwell wrote:
> Andrei Voropaev:
> 
> > Unfortunately I have to say, that real life usage of gnu-arch is even
> > more complecated than what is written in tutorial :) So I'm asking for
> > help again.
> 
> Did you try http://howto.gnuarch.org. Though there isn't a minithowto
> (yet) on what you're specifically trying to do, there is a lot of
> unrelated useful documentation. :) 

After reading it I got an impression that it is the best to maintain
separate copies and merge them from time to time :)

> 
> > Hm. It is possible for all of us to create our own archives by tagging,
> > and then merging our changes back into single archive. But for certain
> > simple changes it would be nice if my collegue could simply commit his
> > changes in my archive.
> >
> > How do I achieve it?  Should I change umask before creating an archive
> > and importing any projects into it? Or is there some gnu-arch option
> > that would do it for me? Really, changing umask every time I have to do
> > changes to archive is not very convinient.
> 
> If you insist upon having a shared archive, then you have three choices: 
> 
> 1. Use a shared account, typically by creating a new account, and adding
> both his and your ssh keys to authorized_keys for that account.
> 
> 2. Keep seperate accounts. Though some people manage to pull this off by
> fiddling with permissions and umasks, it seems that most people end up
> in permissions hell. 
> 
> 3. Set up a patch queue manager like arch-pqm. Though this will general
> solve more problems than it creates, this solution isn't flawless
> because of an edge case in star-merge that is magnified by the behavior
> a pqm encourages.

I guess I'll vote for #1. Looks like #3 is similar to #1, except that
this "shared account" is managed by program.

Thank you

Andrei




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]