[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: More locking, sort of

From: Kaz Kylheku
Subject: Re: More locking, sort of
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 10:37:47 -0700 (PDT)

On Thu, 5 Sep 2002 address@hidden wrote:

> Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 13:10:51 -0400
> From: address@hidden
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: [info-cvs] More locking, sort of
> Hi wizards.  I have what I believe to be a different variant of the
> perpetual question about locking.  I have a situation where, due to
> persistent problems with some hackers modifying some parts of a code
> base without understanding it first, we end up with broken code much
> more frequently than is justified.

And you expect a version control system to solve this problem?

> Obviously, there are political problems at work here; it's not
> feasible to beg, borrow, steal, buy, or evolve, a better breed of
> hacker. 

Set up a Unix group which has write access to the repository.
Ensure that everything in the repository is read-only to everyone
else, and ensure that the directories all have the setuid bit
so that newly created directories inherit these permissions.

Developers who are not in the privileged group must send patches
to someone in that group in order to change the software.
Set up a mailing list for that purpose.

Initially, put only yourself into the privileged group.  Those who
consistently send quality patches get added to the write access group.
Those who break the software get demoted to the patch-only group.

And of course those who don't produce acceptable patches should be
fired. This way you have a visible process which builds solid evidence
against the non-producers, and prevents them from being

Meta-CVS: solid version control tool with directory structure versioning.

reply via email to

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