I like to think of a web host and version control as 2 completely separate entities. I am opposed to the idea of baking the two into one.
It would be neat to see Google Code allow projects that are hosted on app engine to be private and then add a version control client to the SDK. I understand that Google code does not plan on allowing private projects, but I would have to think there is potential there to use their infrastructure for a private vcs of App Engine projects. Google developers put their code into a private vcs somewhere!?!? On Oct 7, 8:48 am, hawkett <hawk...@gmail.com> wrote: > Limiting it to the developer who uploaded the code doesn't really help > in a decent sized team where multiple developers upload the code. > Developer A uploads version 1.3.37, and developer B uploads version > 1.3.38, from an business IP perspective that's two developer accounts > that get access to the whole code base. Multiply by N. > > And before people say - 'you should only have one guy uploading code' > - that's not a philosophy I subscribe to, based on > > 1. The hit by a bus problem - teams where only one member is familiar > with a task. This is mitigated by multiple team members being familiar > and active across multiple project tasks, and good policy. > 2. Isolation of responsibility problem - this is a security risk, > morale risk, quality risk and stale process risk. Team members are > pretty capable people generally, and sharing responsibility across > multiple project elements is a good thing from all these perspectives. > > And no, there shouldn't be one 'appengine super user' account that > every team member uses to achieve the above. > > Not trying to be antagonistic, but I really want to put a solid stake > in the ground right opposite the argument that this is a good thing. > This will make a difference to business customers - technical > arguments aside, they like to hear - 'there is no download option'. > > Thanks, > > Colin > > On Oct 7, 3:37 am, Geoffrey Spear <geoffsp...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Oct 6, 6:27 pm, andy stevko <andy.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > One issue with the download code option is how it works in the context of > > > an > > > app store. > > > If I license an application thru a store, can I then download the code, > > > modify it, and redeploy? > > > Also - if I have sensitive information (like Authorize.net keys) coded > > > into > > > my application, the information was basically inaccessible prior to this > > > feature. > > > The item in the release notes says that it would be downloadable by > > the developer who uploaded the version. If you are that developer, > > you already have (or had) the source code. If you're not, you > > wouldn't be able to get it, even if you're an administrator of the > > app. To me it looks like the App Engine team got the balance right, > > and I'm wondering if all of the "+1" people piling on really get > > what's being described. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google App Engine" group. To post to this group, send email to google-appeng...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-appengine+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine?hl=en.
