On 06.08.2010 20:18, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Greg Hudson <ghudson_at_mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 13:50 -0400, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>>
>>> I'm doing some more thinking about repository-dictated configuration,
>>>
>> I get nervous when I see people talk about repository-dictated
>> configuration as an extension of the general configuration framework.
>>
>> There are a lot of things a repository should not be able to configure
>> for trust reasons--in particular, what commands the client runs. When
>> you check out material from a repository, you are not handing over the
>> keys to your machine or account, just retrieving content. In fact, I
>> think there are only a few specific configuration variables which a
>> repository should be able to influence, such as mime-type recognition.
>>
> Agree with the general point, but it raises another point: which
> values are acceptable for overriding? Are they hardcoded or
> configurable (if configurable, that kinda defeats the point, since
> they'd have to be configured locally)? White list? Black list?
>
> Would a hard-coded list be something that depends on application
> (corporate vs. open source vs. some other deployment)?
>
I'd suggest a hard-coded list in libsvn_client. The type of deployment
is irrelevant, because anyone can hack the source to suit their needs.
The important bit is that we put a safe default whitelist into the code
we publish.
-- Brane
Received on 2010-08-06 20:28:31 CEST