Re: [PATCH] Authz support in Svnserve
From: Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_MIT.EDU>
Date: 2005-08-24 17:21:20 CEST
Your code looks great, with one caveat. I had some quibbles with the
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 10:51 +0200, David Anderson wrote:
This field should be named authz_repos_name if it is only useful for
(My inclination is that it's only useful for authz, and the field name
+ If no authz rules are
Your audience is someone reading the code for the first time in 2006,
+ /* If the authz request is for the empty path (ie. ""), replace it
Makes me feel that there is squishy design in the system, possibly
+ /* Get authz's opinion on the access. If authz is disabled in the
"The function"? You mean this function? "If authz is disabled in the
+ /* If the required access is blanket-granted AND granted by
"Complies with NEEDS_USERNAME restrictions"? "AND we already have a
+ nothing needs to be done. Create the FS access and send a trivial
Two spaces after period.
+ /* If the required blanket access can be obtained by authenticating,
Don't confuse the reader; we force requiring a username because we need
+ /* Now that an authentication has been done (if using protocol
Don't confuse the reader; protocol version 2 is essentially always in
+ succeeded. So we simply request write access and a username
Remove the word "simply"; this isn't really simple.
+ /* Make sure it's possible for the client to authenticate. Note
"Note that this doesn't take into account the authz configuration read
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|
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.