On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 09:09:49AM +0200, Thomas Braun wrote:
> Hello,
>
> we are using subversion 1.4.6 in our company and we need to upgrade to
> subversion 1.5.6.
>
> On our test installation we are suffering from the bug mentioned in
> issue 3242.
> There are only few projects where somebody really has read or write
> access on root.
>
> Is there any way that this bug can be fixed in 1.5.6 ?
As far as I know, no one is looking at this bug right now.
I know that this is unfortunate for authz users using a default-deny
policy.
The problem with issue #3242 is that it is really a design bug rather
than a simple coding error. Because of this, it is not trivial to fix
the problem, and somebody will have to invest time to rewrite parts
of the authz framework or try to implement other workarounds.
This could take a couple of weeks, even with full-time work.
Several developers have already taken a shot at possible workarounds.
While doing so, they uncovered the underlying design issue which has
so far prevented the workarounds from working.
At least that is my understanding of the situation.
Given this, I'd say the best way to make sure we get a fix for this quickly
is by providing additional developer resources which focus solely on this
problem. I see two ways to do this.
One way is providing help if you have capable developers in-house.
More contributors are always welcome, and an active and healthy relationship
to Subversion's developer community can be beneficial in the long-run
for any business, especially if you use Subversion yourself, but also
from e.g. a marketing perspective. Don't dismiss the benefits of direct
involvement in the development process. Oh, and you also get #3242 fixed.
The other way is to offer to fund an existing developer who can't
otherwise afford to pick up a task as big as #3242 due to lack of time.
That might convince someone already familiar with the code base to work
on this. Since a number of users are affected by this, and most of them
seem to be corporate users, funding could probably be pooled with some
coordination between affected parties. The Subversion Corporation
(http://www.subversion.org) would be the appropriate contact at our end.
Stefan
------------------------------------------------------
http://subversion.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=462&dsMessageId=2377365
Received on 2009-07-31 14:59:51 CEST