[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Design Questions

From: Greg Stein <gstein_at_lyra.org>
Date: 2000-08-09 14:56:44 CEST

On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 07:25:02AM -0400, Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
> Another way to describe this scenario is that you have a number of distinct
> products that end up checked out into a common source code tree structure.
> In DCMS this can be handled by putting the more sensitive stuff in a
> separate project and controlling access to that project. When checked out,
> the various projects can share the same source tree structure.

I continue to wonder why DCMS is always brought up on the Subversion list?

The scenario you describe is valid. Point granted. Why must it always be
tied back to DCMS?

> > Here at MIT we have a source tree which
> > is composed almost entirely of free software, but has a few
> > directories containing proprietary stuff like AFS binaries. We'd very
> > much like to make the free portions of the tree readable to anyone,
> > but if we had to have the same permissions on all parts of a given
> > branch, we'd have to restrict the whole repository and then make
> > snapshots of the public parts available or some other kludge.

Subversion will have fine-grained ACLs that can be set. You can read-protect
directories or individual files.

(other rights, such as modify, create, delete, etc will be available)


Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:06 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.