Re: Obliterate and auditability

At 10:10 AM -0400 4/21/08, John Peacock wrote:
>C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>I say that Subversion shouldn't bother with dropping revisions,
>>should record obliterations as revision properties, and that's that.
>
>+1
>
>>But I resonate with those who believe that auditability as a goal
>>runs closer to the spirit of what a version control tool is than
>>does the untraceable disposal of versioned data.
>
><aol>me too!</aol>

+1 for me on these comments. And since I don't say much on this
mailing list, let me note that I am a person who *does* want an
official easy way to 'Obliterate' a previously-commited revision.
But I don't think we need to obliterate the fact that the revision
ever existed.

When it comes to making sure 'Obliterate' is not leaving behind any
sensitive information, I'd be happy enough with some vague note of
what the revision did. "Revision #1313 changed files in directory
<x>, but those changes have been completely removed as of <date>",
where <x> is the name of some directory which existed before that
revision was made. Ie, you wouldn't record the name of any files
which were changed, or any directories which had been added by the
revision that you are now obliterating.

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   gad_at_gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer           or  gad_at_freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  drosih_at_rpi.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org