Re: [fossil-users] fossil clone question
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:53:52 +0200, Andy Bradford wrote: Thus said "j. van den hoff" on Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:31:28 +0200: 1.in `orig.fossil'the(sole) `setup'user isme (current_login_name), which is as it should be. (as an aside: the help text does speak of `admin' user, but actually its the `setup' user (and a `admin' user has different (somewhat lower) permissions) -- so this might call for a change of the help text?) Minor issue but should probably be clarified. sure minor but a question of consistency. the option is even named `--admin-user'. easiest way to "fix" it might be a different naming scheme in the GUI setup user --> admin user admin user --> whatever 2. but in `clone.fossil' the web interface tells me that there are two `setup' users: current_login_name and JoeDoe question: should I expect this (I did not...)? I would have thought that there will be a single one (JoeDoe). and that is also what I intend to get... Either the text is wrong, or the behavior is wrong. One of them must be fixed. I believe it is not creating a new user that matches your login, but rather is preserving the user that exists in the source fossil, yes, that's probably the case. perhaps it is related to this comment I made: http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg12524.html You are doing a file clone. Other types of cloning do not do this: $ fossil clone -A someone ssh://remote//tmp/test.fossil new.fossil ... project-id: 78f3c64bd97f33cb0a7606842ca83ddf25776819 admin-user: someone (password is "2c9149") $ fossil user -R new.fossil list anonymousAnon developerDev nobody Nobody reader Reader someone I see. I would argue that the file system based clone should behave the same: if I explicitly specify a non-default admin-user that should be the exclusive one after in the clone. ... if I don't care that the locally used user names are becoming known and the passwords are irrelevant/not valuable either: are there any more points to consider, i.e. is there anything else in the database which one should not distribute just so? Email addresses. Private branches in the repository. IP addresses. There is an option to scrub the fossil of sensitive info. fossil help scrub thanks for this tip. I was not aware of that. j. Andy -- Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] fossil clone question
Thus said "j. van den hoff" on Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:31:28 +0200: > 1.in `orig.fossil'the(sole) `setup'user isme > (current_login_name), which is as it should be. (as an aside: the help > text does speak of `admin' user, but actually its the `setup' user > (and a `admin' user has different (somewhat lower) permissions) -- so > this might call for a change of the help text?) Minor issue but should probably be clarified. > 2. but in `clone.fossil' the web interface tells me that there are two > `setup' users: current_login_name and JoeDoe > > question: should I expect this (I did not...)? I would have thought > that there will be a single one (JoeDoe). and that is also what I > intend to get... Either the text is wrong, or the behavior is wrong. One of them must be fixed. I believe it is not creating a new user that matches your login, but rather is preserving the user that exists in the source fossil, perhaps it is related to this comment I made: http://www.mail-archive.com/fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org/msg12524.html You are doing a file clone. Other types of cloning do not do this: $ fossil clone -A someone ssh://remote//tmp/test.fossil new.fossil ... project-id: 78f3c64bd97f33cb0a7606842ca83ddf25776819 admin-user: someone (password is "2c9149") $ fossil user -R new.fossil list anonymousAnon developerDev nobody Nobody reader Reader someone > ... if I don't care that the locally used user names are becoming > known and the passwords are irrelevant/not valuable either: are there > any more points to consider, i.e. is there anything else in the > database which one should not distribute just so? Email addresses. Private branches in the repository. IP addresses. There is an option to scrub the fossil of sensitive info. fossil help scrub Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 400052034eb3 ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
[fossil-users] fossil clone question
hi, `fossil help clone' tells me: 8<-- By default, your current login name is used to create the default admin user. This can be overridden using the -A|--admin-user parameter. 8<-- I just tried that locally (within my file system): fossil clone -A JoeDoe orig.fossil clone.fossil 1. in `orig.fossil' the (sole) `setup' user is me (current_login_name), which is as it should be. (as an aside: the help text does speak of `admin' user, but actually its the `setup' user (and a `admin' user has different (somewhat lower) permissions) -- so this might call for a change of the help text?) 2. but in `clone.fossil' the web interface tells me that there are two `setup' users: current_login_name and JoeDoe question: should I expect this (I did not...)? I would have thought that there will be a single one (JoeDoe). and that is also what I intend to get... 3. a partly related question: I'm not 100% sure what are the implications of sending a fossil repository file to someone else. I know that the user/password information is in the sqlite database and that one can easily get at the passwords. my question is: if I don't care that the locally used user names are becoming known and the passwords are irrelevant/not valuable either: are there any more points to consider, i.e. is there anything else in the database which one should not distribute just so? thanks in advance for any enligthenment. j. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
