Hi David, you are full of ideas as usual. On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 13:16 +0930, David O'Shea wrote: > Hi Kristis, > > Yes, I guess that preventing commits to tags is really quite a small thing, > and since there are plenty of things we want to do which do depend on the bug > tracking integration, it doesn't really matter if there is one part that > COULD be separated. > > Is there a bug covering your suggestions regarding the access control based > on the integration? I was thinking just yesterday how I would like to have a > per-branch state, say one of:
Yes. Ideas on this are in: http://bugzilla.mkgnu.net/show_bug.cgi?id=859 It includes your feedback from about a year ago. Only now you have som more :) I just added this on the roadmap. Realistically, I see this getting implemented around 2008Q1, unless I'm really motivated :) > 1. allow all commits > 2. only allow commits that specify a bug ID > 3. only allow commits that specify one of a specific set of bug IDs (although > I guess using keywords might be a better way of implementing this) > 4. only allow commits from certain user IDs (which might not be the product > manager or component owner - it might be someone that they have delegated to) > 5. prevent all commits > > As usual, I wish I could contribute to the project, but I'm not the IT guy :( > > Regards, > David > > > ---------------------------------------------- > David O'Shea > Engineer > DSpace Pty Ltd > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www.dspace.com.au > T: +61 8 8260 8118 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kristis Makris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, 18 September 2007 10:31 > > To: David O'Shea > > Cc: Marcel Loose; [email protected] > > Subject: RE: [scmbug-users] Enhancement request: do not allow commit > > toatag in Subversion > > > > > > Hi David, > > > > I see where you are going with this. It feels more natural to separate > > access control from integration. I doubt there would be any noticable > > performance penalty. > > > > I can however think of some situations where "access control" may need > > to rely on the integration. For example allow commits on a specific > > branch only by the product manager or a component owner (both are > > defined in the bug-tracker). Or commits should be accepted on a branch > > only against bugs flagged by a specific keyword in the > > bug-tracker (e.g. > > ACCEPT_WHILE_FROZEN_FOR_3.0_RELEASE). Or only against bugs that have a > > patch pending for review. The point is that setting read-only > > tags is a > > subset of setting up branches that accept limited patches going into > > them (e.g. a released, stable branch that should only accept minor bug > > fixes). > > > > The big argument you raise though is that implementation of access > > control should not interfere with the ease of configuration > > of the other > > features of Scmbug. And I don't have a viewpoint or design of how this > > could be implemented yet. This seems to be a much more > > general problem: > > most SCM systems don't support such fine-grained control of > > access. And > > to implement it, one needs to implement hooks and at least decode the > > SCM systems arguments to those hooks. All of which Scmbug does. > > > > Perhaps you are just outlining the need for a more modular > > architecture. > > Were we should supply package scm-glue (which offers the > > logic to decode > > the hooks), and particular implementations of using those hooks from > > there one (scm-glue-scmbug, scm-glue-DSpaceACL). I can't turn against > > that. Perhaps people need the modularity of a common framework for > > implementing on their own ... all the new features they keep > > requesting > > from Scmbug. > > > > The attitude so far had been to implement all in one framework only > > because progress was relatively fast and no-one else was showing > > interest in cooperating. > > > > Hmmmmm.... > > > > On Tue, 2007-09-18 at 09:04 +0930, David O'Shea wrote: > > > Hi Kristis, Marcel, > > > > > > Just a thought on this: Here, we use a modified version of > > commit-access-control.pl to make tags read-only. Would it be > > better to concentrate on making scmbug very good at > > integrating SCM and bug tracking and avoid adding features > > that aren't tied in with that? If someone wanted read-only > > tags but not SCM-bug tracking integration, would it not be > > difficult for them to set scmbug up this way? If you had two > > tools, scmbug plus something like commit-access-control.pl, > > sure you would have the annoyance of having to tell two > > different tools how your branches/tags/trunk in Subversion > > are laid out, but that could probably be easily fixed by > > making a common configuration file and with some > > #include-style directive. Would there be significant > > performance differences between using one hook and two hooks? > > > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > David > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------- > > > David O'Shea > > > Engineer > > > DSpace Pty Ltd > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > www.dspace.com.au > > > T: +61 8 8260 8118 > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of > > > > Kristis Makris > > > > Sent: Friday, 14 September 2007 05:01 > > > > To: Marcel Loose > > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > > Subject: Re: [scmbug-users] Enhancement request: do not allow > > > > commit to > > > > atag in Subversion > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Marcel, what you are proposing is not just possible > > but would be an > > > > ideal feature we'd like to add. This was proposed sometime ago: > > > > > > > > http://bugzilla.mkgnu.net/show_bug.cgi?id=859 > > > > > > > > No one is working on it right now. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 13:29 +0200, Marcel Loose wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > One of the "problems" I have with Subversion is that it > > > > allows you to commit to a tag (CVS will not let you do this, > > > > unless it is a branch tag of course). According to the > > > > Subversion manual, you can make the tags directory > > > > "create-only" by using an access control hook script. So, > > > > since Scmbug is actually a, very nice and versatile, hook > > > > script, would it be possible to add an option to Scmbug to > > > > disallow commits to an existing directory in the tags directory? > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Marcel Loose. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > scmbug-users mailing list > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > http://lists.mkgnu.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scmbug-users > > > > > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ scmbug-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mkgnu.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scmbug-users
