|
| From: | Boris |
| Subject: | [Monotone-devel] Re: How will policy branches work? |
| Date: | Tue, 05 Feb 2008 17:49:30 +0200 |
| User-agent: | Opera Mail/9.22 (Win32) |
On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 13:45 +0200, Boris wrote: [...]Once a file is checked into the branch "sourcecode" it must remain in this branch.Not sure what you mean here.
Let's say a developer changes something in "sourcecode" and commits the change to "documentation" (either accidentally or intentionally). As the documentation team has access to this branch it would start to see files they really shouldn't see?
The settings would be stored in the database and can not be changed by anyone except the administrator(s).Yes, but remember that the list of administrators is in the project definition file. So it's fairly easy for someone to change who they consider to be administrators.
If the project definition file is a local file I don't understand why it contains a list of administrators. I must misunderstand as it sounds as if everyone can make himself administrator by changing his project definition file? Is there anything else stored in the project definition file except a list of administrators (I wonder what it's good for)?
[...]We don't care very much at all about who can write things, because that's not really enforceable in a distributed system. Instead we concentrate on ignoring things we don't like.
You are right. I need to clarify my requirements: I need to define projects and assign people to them. People can do whatever they want in their projects. However they must not get the files in the other projects (which means they either aren't transferred or they are transferred but can not be checked out - if that is safe at all). That again means it shouldn't be possible for people to simply assign themselves to other projects.
From what I understand policy branches will help me somehow? I'm not really sure though as I didn't understand the part with the project definition file and administrators yet.
We do have some support for preventing people from seeing things, but it assumes that people don't talk directly to other people who have things they aren't allowed to see. This can be changed, but it would be a
I setup a central monotone server and configured it accordingly assuming that everyone will use this server. That always worked well until the server went offline and people started to sync with each other. It's great that work can continue while the central server is offline. But that made me think about what's going to happen with all the projects in the database.
fairly significant change that most of us probably don't particularly care about (if secrecy is that important, just put firewalls between everyone).
Does anyone know how other distributed version control systems work in that regard? I understand that a centralized version control system would put me back in full control but I wouldn't want to miss the advantages of a distributed system.
Boris
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |