[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multi-committer functionality revisited

From: Robert Anderson
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multi-committer functionality revisited
Date: 17 Nov 2003 15:09:28 -0800

On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 15:09, Tom Lord wrote:
>     > From: "Robert Anderson" <address@hidden>
>     > I am working in an NFS environment where all access to an archive
>     > is "local."  
>     [....]
>     > The problem is of course that due to a non-negotiable,
>     > shop-mandated umask, the ++revision-lock directory is not group
>     > writable, and each person who commits locks out all the others
>     > until they make it so.  This is problematic both functionally and
>     > in the "why are you giving us this crap tool which chokes on the
>     > most basic of operations" depts.
>     > So I'm looking for a solution.  
> Why don't you use some non-local transport for that archive, then?

Because I want the local performance (but it's a negotiable point). 
However, I don't think it solves the problem, does it?  The only
transport available to me is sftp, and I wouldn't know how to solve the
problem there, either.

> You could spend an evening just setting up a server.

Unfortunately, I can't.  This code doesn't go outside the local network
and I don't have the authority or means to set up a server on it.

> Alternatively, looking (at least briefly) back at the Xouvert thread,
> it seems we overlooked a sane solution at that time (blush.  But then
> that's why I proposed the "make a new savannah account" solution after
> all - to buy time to think):
> While I would be against the "copy permissions" hack and against a
> "tla umask" command, I would not be against support for archive 
> URLs of the forms (suitably adjusted if I've violated uri syntax):
>       file%umask=XXX://path/to/your/archive
>       sftp%umask=XXX:/address@hidden/path/to/your/archive
>       sftp:/%umask=XXX,address@hidden/path/to/your/archive
>         etc.

That's how you'd register the archive, I presume?


reply via email to

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