|Subject:||Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Re: Future of monotone|
|Date:||Tue, 05 Feb 2008 18:56:25 +0100|
|User-agent:||Mozilla-Thunderbird 188.8.131.52 (X11/20080110)|
Hi, Boris wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean. As monotone doesn't support a project concept I can tell everyone that some branches really mean project. But there is nothing which will prevent developers from creating a new branch with any name (and maybe a name which actually is meant to be used only for branches belonging to another project)?
Well, again, in the end, you can't prevent anybody from creating whatever branch he likes on *his* copy of the repository.
What you can (already) do is preventing him to upload that branch to your (or the company's central) repository. Or what kind of control are you missing there? I happen to find the "who is allowed to upload to what branch" there pretty sufficient for my (admittedly very simplistic) needs.
You are right that with read-/write-permissions you can work around a bit. If policy branches allow fine-grained control though I understand the project concept is not really needed. I guess what I'm really looking for then is a distributed version control system with centralized permission settings.
Hm.. in general, yeah, that sounds somewhat like you are going to love policy branches.
Ah, not bad! Yes, something like this might help to add more users to monotone. Developers typically don't seem to have any problems at all. If it comes to web designers who want to work on HTML pages or even managers I can't really tell them to use command-line commands. They don't need a fancy GUI really which is a lot of work to create and maintain. It's just the opposite: The less buttons the better. :)
Hehe.. in that case, we already have the very best GUI: no buttons at all. Nothing to download, no requirements, nothing. :-)
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|